| Author |
Message |
Chris H
Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Mar 2004
Posts: 19978
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 1:52 am |
|
just done a few quotes in my sisters name.
used a 25 tx, 21 turbo and a 19 16V.
Cheapest is the 21 turbo
then the 25 tx 2litre 8v beast (I don't get it either)
then the dearest by 50 quid more than the 25 was the 19 16V.
All cars had a value of £500 yet they want 900 quid fully comp or £7/800 3rd part F&T.
Fucking joke. |
|
|
|
|
Neal
Forum Moderator
Joined: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 7432
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 2:11 am |
|
Yep the groupings are a farce. They obviously set them at the time of release based on performance, ease of theft and desirability to thieves etc.
Problem is, 15 years later they are no harder or easier to steal than they were before, but
a) the performance benchmark has changed and
b) noone really wants to steal a 15 year old car
but the grouping doesnt change to reflect that. |
|
|
|
|
roddy21t
Site Subscriber
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 589
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 2:46 am |
|
21t's have always been cheap to insure for some reason, iv read its got something to do with being a 4 door saloon and the companies class that as a "family" car and 3 door cars are classed as "sporty" and attractive and more desirable to no hoper thief's,
You could then say that the Cossie Sapphire is 4 door so it should be cheap, but i think nearly all fords are a victim of the joy rider so ALL fords are gonna be dear if they show any signs of being sporty 
Out of interest, is the qoute's the same for a 3 door 1916v hatch and a 4 door chamade 1916v of the same year etc etc, im sure i can remember a few years back the chamade being slighty cheaper due to it being a 4 door .......  |
|
|
|
|
Chris H
Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Mar 2004
Posts: 19978
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 2:55 am |
|
the 19's are both group 15's wether its a 3 door or 4 door.
Its fucking stupid.
the clio 16V is a gropup 12!
The 2l 16V megane is a group 11 and the 2l 8V megane is a group 9!
A 1.4 19 btw wether its the 80bhp or the 60bhp one is a group 8! |
|
|
|
|
roddy21t
Site Subscriber
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 589
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 3:00 am |
|
It is pretty strange how they work it,
but as you said yourself, there are all these neds buying the 1916v's etc now cause they are cheap and wrecking them, so that wont help the cuase either |
|
|
|
|
Chris H
Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Mar 2004
Posts: 19978
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 3:07 am |
|
yeah but new it was a group 15, its not changed since arsehole bought them.
It was a group 15 when peopel were paying 16 grand for them!
Hos can they even imagine to make a 25 2 litre na crap heap dearer toinsure than the 21 turbo!?! Madness. |
|
|
|
|
roddy21t
Site Subscriber
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 589
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 3:24 am |
|
Yeah a 25 dearer than a 21t is pretty daft
When i lived in Elgin my insurance on the 1916v was £22 a month fully comp, but when i met Susan and moved down to Hamilton, a G post code it went to £45 a month,
on the 21t i now pay £26 a month fully comp with Susan as a named driver, so if i where back up in Elgin id probably be paying peanuts for my insurance ............ so i blame Susan |
|
|
|
|
Chris H
Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Mar 2004
Posts: 19978
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 3:29 am |
|
lucky your an old git innit!
Old farts pay pennies!
my mums paying about 25 quid a month for the red 1.4 19! |
|
|
|
|
Dan
Site Subscriber
Joined: 28 Jan 2005
Posts: 3547
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 3:45 am |
|
lol, my dad is payin 82 quid a year, for:
1993 ford maverick
1999 toyota rav 4
1994 nissan micra
my mum, my aunt(mums twin), and him all fully comp!
atmittedly he is 56! |
|
|
|
|
Addie
Site Subscriber
Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Posts: 1141
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 4:16 am |
|
| Chris H wrote: |
lucky your an old git innit!
Old farts pay pennies!
my mums paying about 25 quid a month for the red 1.4 19! |
I'm only paying £30.17 a month in my name on the Valver and I'm 21.
Thats £2 a month more then the Cordoba was despite being 5 years older and the same insurance group. Go figure. |
|
|
|
|
roddy21t
Site Subscriber
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 589
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 4:23 am |
|
lol Chris, i did'nt know you where gonna say that ........ much
But i forgot to say that i was 25-26 yrs old when i 1st insured the 1916v, not the "old" git i am now
but then again, i suppouse having things on you're license that you should not have would'nt affect you're qoute's though  |
|
|
|
|
JB
Mr Quoter-vator
Joined: 16 Feb 2004
Posts: 7405
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 4:30 am |
|
i paid 295 this yr tpft. not much point in fully comp as its prolly worth less than the excess. |
|
|
|
|
Chris H
Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Mar 2004
Posts: 19978
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 4:32 am |
|
I can't get quotes for me for any car. Apparently I am never to drive in britain again.
The quotes are on my sisters name.
Ambers 1.6 RXE megane is a group 6, 300 quid less to insure than a 60bhp rl 19! Its got, leccy windows, plip locking and all the toys and an extra 30bhp but 300 quid less to insure!
Stupid innit. |
|
|
|
|
JB
Mr Quoter-vator
Joined: 16 Feb 2004
Posts: 7405
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 4:39 am |
|
do you think insurance would be better per person...or per vehicle?
ie in some countries i think, as long as someone insures the car, it (as a car) is covered to be driven by anyone...
or
you get insurance to drive...doesnt matter what car, you just get a fixed cost based on age etc. |
|
|
|
|
Chris H
Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Mar 2004
Posts: 19978
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 4:40 am |
|
the insure the car and anyone can drive it policy is much better |
|
|
|
|
JB
Mr Quoter-vator
Joined: 16 Feb 2004
Posts: 7405
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 4:40 am |
|
i also think that when you stop driving, ie when your old, or at some point in your life, you should have your money back that has not been needed.
as if you cant use it, why cant you have it back, paying insurance is a bit like asking someone to hold you money for you so you dont spend it and so you have a little stash of money just when you need it....if you dont need it you would ask for that person to give it back. |
|
|
|
|
Neal
Forum Moderator
Joined: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 7432
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 4:47 am |
|
| JB wrote: |
do you think insurance would be better per person...or per vehicle?
ie in some countries i think, as long as someone insures the car, it (as a car) is covered to be driven by anyone... |
That would be fair-ish i guess, but dangerous and wide open to abuse. 60 year old grandad insures a scooby, 17 year old ned rags it about. Basically the same as named-driver system now.
| JB wrote: |
or
you get insurance to drive...doesnt matter what car, you just get a fixed cost based on age etc. |
That is certainly NOT fair in any way shape or form, and is also dangerous. If you're going to pay a fixed price, all 17 year olds might as well all buy Cossies or 200SXs eh? Don't fancy that scenario on the roads.
I think the current system is basically logical, as it takes into account a wide range of circumstances, it's just that the grouping system is highly flawed as discussed in previous posts, and the whole thing is way over priced.
The ONLY reason it's as expensive as it is, is because it can be. |
|
|
|
|
Neal
Forum Moderator
Joined: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 7432
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 5:22 am |
|
| JB wrote: |
i also think that when you stop driving, ie when your old, or at some point in your life, you should have your money back that has not been needed.
as if you cant use it, why cant you have it back, paying insurance is a bit like asking someone to hold you money for you so you dont spend it and so you have a little stash of money just when you need it....if you dont need it you would ask for that person to give it back. |
Because that's not the point. In theory, your money is paying for a service, so even if you never claim, you have got what you paid for.
Insurance is basically a gamble. You might need it, you might not. If you don't, then you 'lose out' out on your premiums. If, god forbid, you have a big accident and write off several cars or a person, you'll potentially 'win' more in the payouts to the parties involved than your premiums will ever have amounted to.
If insurance wasn't a legal requirement but you knew that in the event of an accident, you 100% certainly WOULD be made to pay for the damage, every penny of it, one way or another, either financially, or if you couldn't pay - by public flogging etc., would you take out a policy?
The main gripe with insurance is the way you pay religiously year on year and when you need to claim, they try everything they possibly can to weasel out of coughing up fair and square. That's what takes the piss. Big time. As Alan will attest to. |
|
|
|
|
JB
Mr Quoter-vator
Joined: 16 Feb 2004
Posts: 7405
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 6:11 am |
|
| Neal 19 16v wrote: |
If insurance wasn't a legal requirement but you knew that in the event of an accident, you 100% certainly WOULD be made to pay for the damage, every penny of it, one way or another, either financially, or if you couldn't pay - by public flogging etc., would you take out a policy?
The main gripe with insurance is the way you pay religiously year on year and when you need to claim, they try everything they possibly can to weasel out of coughing up fair and square. That's what takes the piss. Big time. As Alan will attest to. |
yeah i would take out the policy methinks...although i may think different in the actual situ.
but yeah, thats the bit i hate, you pay all this money to the companies and they they try their hardest not to help you....why? |
|
|
|
|
Chris H
Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Mar 2004
Posts: 19978
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 6:18 am |
|
well JB its simple, you don't make money beign nice. |
|
|
|
|
Stephen
Level 8 User
Joined: 14 Apr 2004
Posts: 278
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 17, 2005 8:09 am |
|
| Chris H wrote: |
I can't get quotes for me for any car. Apparently I am never to drive in britain again.
|
LOL!
Go on, what happened? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
