Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Big profits at 17 insurance companies... Or is there?

Options
1235»

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,526 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Eggs For Dinner wrote: »
    Do you think a claimants solicitor works for the fun of it?

    I don't think a clown should work for fun, I fail to see what point you are trying to make. :confused:

    But again you offer no evidence or data to back up our claims.

    In fact the only transparent consistent data that was offered on thread shows
    injury case is settled through the Personal Injuries Assessment Board, the delivery costs (legal and other experts) amount to 6pc of the award. The assessment board generally does not pay legal costs.

    Legal and experts at 6%. That seems completely fair and reasonable to me.

    So the narrative that the greedy lawyers are one of the main reasons premiums are so high doesn't stack up. That said High Court costs for the vast minority that get there are an absolute joke, but that is not exclusive to liability cases.

    Also engaging with legal help is not a crime, nor does it mean you are trying to scam the system, the other narrative that insurance companies are the bastion of honesty and would never try low ball a claimant is pretty hilarious.


  • Options
    #123
    Eggs For Dinner
    Registered Users Posts: 2,937 ✭✭✭Eggs For Dinner


    Your argument is all over the shop. Your example above is the legal costs for a PIAB settled case, which obviously are lower. Even at the stupid levels in the book of quantum, we would all be better off if claims were sorted out here.

    The majority are not settled through PIAB, usually at the behest of the claimants solicitor and the insurer picks up both sets of legal costs when settled

    Anyway, I'm done here. I'm not a spokesman for insurers. I'm just trying to give an insight in to the real world, away from tilting at windmills


  • Options
    #124
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,526 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Eggs For Dinner wrote: »
    Anyway, I'm done here. I'm not a spokesman for insurers.

    Maybe you should be, given the level of spoofing you have indulged in you would be perfect for Insurance Ireland.

    ;)


  • Options
    #125
    defrule
    Registered Users Posts: 190 ✭✭defrule


    Just want to clarify the legal requirement thing because it is being viewed as a bad thing.

    If you were driving and hit someone and cause very serious damage to their expensive car and they sue you for 30k. If you didn’t have insurance you will likely be broke, you make even need to sell your house to pay up. Insurance protects you from financial ruin.

    Now, suppose some young lad hit you and you new BMW is trashed. The lad is uninsured and not a cent to his name. Who’s going to redress you for the damage you suffered? For sure he can’t.


  • Options
    #126
    MrFresh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    Wouldn't many of the insurance company have insurance on their major liability portfolios to make sure a large claim doesn't eat into their profits too much?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    Nikki Sixx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 426 ✭✭Nikki Sixx


    It’s all about profit margins. If insurance companies can reduce or almost eliminate claims they can make multiples of the profits they are already making. The savings will never be passed on to policy holders anyway. That is a myth they are selling the general public.


  • Options
    #128
    fash
    Registered Users Posts: 2,271 ✭✭✭fash


    Nikki Sixx wrote: »
    It’s all about profit margins. If insurance companies can reduce or almost eliminate claims they can make multiples of the profits they are already making. The savings will never be passed on to policy holders anyway. That is a myth they are selling the general public.
    If the profit levels get juicy enough, someone will come in who wants some. That has happened repeatedly in Ireland (with people setting up companies, driving down prices - but doing so without sufficient profits and subsequently collapsing).


  • Options
    #129
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,526 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    fash wrote: »
    If the profit levels get juicy enough, someone will come in who wants some.

    And if they are allowed join the cartel that exists.


  • Options
    #130
    Darc19
    Registered Users Posts: 3,817 ✭✭✭Darc19


    Like most "exclusives" in the indo, the headline is overhyped and the real explanation is buried in a few words near the end when the target reader has stopped reading.

    As others have said, it's comparing against a very poor year.

    What many are missing is that €104m is investment profits, so the real profit is €123m.

    Put it in a per policy figure and you get about €40/average policy.

    Hardly the extortion that the indo claims.

    It's about the same as the estimated cost of fraudulent motor insurance claims cost each policy holder.


  • Options
    #131
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,526 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Darc19 wrote: »
    What many are missing is that €104m is investment profits, so the real profit is €123m.

    What do you think financed those investments? Who finances the loses on the investments? There are questions why they should be gambling at all with our premiums at all, but that is a separate conversation.

    Also the headline figure is not the real story, the real story is they are back in profit after reporting a quarter of billion in losses for 3 years.

    Astonishing really, doesn't quite fit the narrative the poor companies are barely scraping by.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement