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

Car insurance for >15 year old cars

Options
1…78101213…30

Comments

  • Options
    #272
    BexieB
    Registered Users Posts: 19 ✭BexieB


    Just wondering, we're all experiencing insurance company refusing to quote because of the age of our vehicles. Is this considered a 'refusal of insurance' when it comes to answering the question 'have you ever been declined, refused or had insurance cancelled' when applying for insurance? I'd be very reluctant to get three written refusals to go to the Ombudsman with, I'm sure you'd pretty much blacklist yourself.


  • Options
    #273
    Iseedeadpixels
    Registered Users Posts: 4,026 ✭✭✭Iseedeadpixels


    Horrible quotes on my 99 Diesel Passat :( from 1100-2600 shocking carry on.


  • Options
    #274
    grogi
    Registered Users Posts: 8,615 ✭✭✭grogi


    BexieB wrote: »
    Just wondering, we're all experiencing insurance company refusing to quote because of the age of our vehicles. Is this considered a 'refusal of insurance' when it comes to answering the question 'have you ever been declined, refused or had insurance cancelled' when applying for insurance? I'd be very reluctant to get three written refusals to go to the Ombudsman with, I'm sure you'd pretty much blacklist yourself.

    no


  • Options
    #275
    challengemaster
    Registered Users Posts: 16,930 ✭✭✭✭challengemaster


    I'm surprised people are saying BoI insurance is giving them good quotes. Out of curiosity I checked them as my renewal was up recently.

    26, 8 year NCB. 2005 BMW 320Cd

    Renewal with liberty: €647 (full comp, NCB protected)
    BoI quote: €2735.61

    I nearly fell off the chair laughing


  • Options
    #276
    tc20
    Registered Users Posts: 2,425 ✭✭✭tc20


    just got my renewal in the post -

    02 Astra 1.4
    Main driver - me, 20+ years full licence, 9 yrs NCB, 3 soon to expire PP
    Named driver - Mrs tc20, Full licence 3 years.
    Insured with AIG through First Ireland

    Current policy (fully comp) €450
    Previous policy (fully comp, same car) €360
    Renewal €747 FC, €595 TPFT

    Thats an increase of close to 65% for a sh1tbox daily hack (FC) or 33% TPFT :mad:
    Its also the first time they actively encouraged me to go for TPFT cover (which is correct given the value of the car)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #277
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,874 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    Mine has doubled. My old insurer no longer insures older cars.

    I enquired in the UK, as I used to live there. My insurance would be €300. Here they want €900.


  • Options
    #278
    antodeco
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 13,479 ✭✭✭✭antodeco


    Just cost me €99 to insure a 1998 2.8l Z3 :D


  • Options
    #279
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,874 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    antodeco wrote: »
    Just cost me €99 to insure a 1998 2.8l Z3 :D

    Who with?


  • Options
    #280
    ldxo15wus6fpgm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,359 ✭✭✭ldxo15wus6fpgm


    antodeco wrote: »
    Just cost me €99 to insure a 1998 2.8l Z3 :D

    I call bull****, every company has a minimum premium higher than this so unless you've added it to a multi car or commercial policy, pics or it didnt happen.

    Also here's all the justification they need to load up premiums on old cars, bearing in mind that injuries are far more costly than replacing a fairly new car. It's a crash test video with dummies, no gore.

    https://youtu.be/xidhx_f-ouU

    Before I say more I want to put it out there that I drive a 2004 car.

    I don't agree with the way it's being done and you still see the odd '95 deathmobile on the roads but it has helped steer (no pun intended) people away from the mentality of driving a car like that to save money.

    Obviously there are lots of people out there who cannot afford a nearly new car (I am one of them) but at the end of the day if you cannot afford a safe car you cannot afford to drive. In the long run we are all better off for getting these things off the road.

    If you drive an old car and get into an accident, you're more likely to suffer expensive injuries. Insurance works by pooling all our money together to pay claims. People who drive older cars have to pay more because of that, just like people with many points or convictions pay more. It's simple enough.


  • Options
    #281
    grogi
    Registered Users Posts: 8,615 ✭✭✭grogi


    Nolan Sticky Headphone wrote: »
    I call bull****, every company has a minimum premium higher than this so unless you've added it to a multi car or commercial policy, pics or it didnt happen.

    Also here's all the justification they need to load up premiums on old cars, bearing in mind that injuries are far more costly than replacing a fairly new car.

    But it is not your TPL insurance that pays your medical bills, but the other party's. For your TPL premium it should not matter how safe for you the car is, but how safe it is for others.

    If the underwriter takes the potential cost for other insurers into account when setting the premium, it is anti-consumer behaviour. The C. word...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #282
    ldxo15wus6fpgm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,359 ✭✭✭ldxo15wus6fpgm


    grogi wrote: »
    But it is not your TPL insurance that pays your medical bills, but the other party's. For your TPL premium it should not matter how safe for you the car is, but how safe it is for others.

    If the underwriter takes the potential cost for other insurers into account when setting the premium, it is anti-consumer behaviour. The C. word...

    Older cars are less safe for your passengers and also for pedestrians that you hit. All of whom can and will claim against you and your insurer.


  • Options
    #283
    Iseedeadpixels
    Registered Users Posts: 4,026 ✭✭✭Iseedeadpixels


    Nolan Sticky Headphone wrote: »
    Older cars are less safe for your passengers and also for pedestrians that you hit. All of whom can and will claim against you and your insurer.

    Wow I really need one of those new marshmellow cars :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #284
    grogi
    Registered Users Posts: 8,615 ✭✭✭grogi


    Nolan Sticky Headphone wrote: »
    Older cars are less safe for your passengers and also for pedestrians that you hit. All of whom can and will claim against you and your insurer.

    Let's confront that with what the other insurance expert said here not that long time ago:
    Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »
    Insurers have never said that older cars are unsafe, people have chosen to interpret it that way for some reason. Insurers have stated that the reason they are avoiding older cars is because they feel they are used in a disproportionate number of serious claims.

    There may be other factors associated with these larger claims, such as sex, nationality, ethnic origin etc. but equality laws prohibit them from citing these reasons, so they go with the neutral one

    Interesting... So is it about safety, or isn't it?
    Iseedeadpixels wrote: »
    Wow I really need one of those new marshmellow cars :rolleyes:

    But they are. The NCAP tests the cars for pedestrian safety and the criteria for 5* are stricter every year. There is progress here, don't deny it.

    revised_pyrotechnics.jpg


  • Options
    #285
    Sue Pa Key Pa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,060 ✭✭✭Sue Pa Key Pa


    grogi wrote: »

    Interesting... So is it about safety, or isn't it?

    It's about claims


  • Options
    #286
    grogi
    Registered Users Posts: 8,615 ✭✭✭grogi


    Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »
    It's about claims

    I know it is about claims.

    But what is the relationship between claims and older cars. You say it is because older cars generate disproportionate volume of those.

    That is only the result, the symptom. What is the cause?

    Is it about engineered safety (passenger safety, pedestrian safety)? Roadworthiness of the vehicles? Negligence of the owners?


  • Options
    #287
    Iseedeadpixels
    Registered Users Posts: 4,026 ✭✭✭Iseedeadpixels


    Wouldn't matter if you hit a pedestrian at 50-60kmh you would still do serious damage regardless if its a 97 or a 171.


  • Options
    #288
    Sue Pa Key Pa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,060 ✭✭✭Sue Pa Key Pa


    Iseedeadpixels wrote: »
    Wouldn't matter if you hit a pedestrian at 50-60kmh you would still do serious damage regardless if its a 97 or a 171.

    That's true. However, insurers are saying that and similar types of incident is happening more frequently with older cars than newer ones. If the majority of them are wrong, why hasn't one insurer come in and mopped up the entire market with reasonable premiums? Leaving aside that every insurer in Ireland is a member of The Cartel, of course


  • Options
    #289
    Marcusm
    Registered Users Posts: 10,265 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    grogi wrote: »
    I know it is about claims.

    But what is the relationship between claims and older cars. You say it is because older cars generate disproportionate volume of those.

    That is only the result, the symptom. What is the cause?

    Is it about engineered safety (passenger safety, pedestrian safety)? Roadworthiness of the vehicles? Negligence of the owners?

    Because people who set out to create false claims or incidents will generally use a car worth €500 not €15,000 to do it. The reality is that it is the background of the claimants not the age of the cars which is the factor. No doubt there can be an increased prospect of injury with an older car (due to lesser safety standards) but I'm willing to bet that such factor is not as statistically significant as the fraud aspect.


  • Options
    #290
    Sue Pa Key Pa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,060 ✭✭✭Sue Pa Key Pa


    Marcusm wrote: »
    The reality is that it is the background of the claimants not the age of the cars which is the factor. .

    Exactly, but insurers are not allowed cite sex, race, nationality, ethnic origin etc. as a factor so if the age of the vehicle is also a common thread, that's the one they will use


  • Options
    #291
    jimgoose
    Registered Users Posts: 20,171 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »
    Exactly, but insurers are not allowed cite sex, race, nationality, ethnic origin etc. as a factor so if the age of the vehicle is also a common thread, that's the one they will use

    I was staring to suspect as much. That would explain why I'm not getting too bad a creasing really, with my 18-year-old yoke.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #292
    Iseedeadpixels
    Registered Users Posts: 4,026 ✭✭✭Iseedeadpixels


    Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »
    That's true. However, insurers are saying that and similar types of incident is happening more frequently with older cars than newer ones. If the majority of them are wrong, why hasn't one insurer come in and mopped up the entire market with reasonable premiums? Leaving aside that every insurer in Ireland is a member of The Cartel, of course

    Sure loads of them were raided for price fixing recently, sounds dodgy enough to me.


  • Options
    #293
    joeysoap
    Registered Users Posts: 6,240 ✭✭✭joeysoap


    jimgoose wrote: »
    I was staring to suspect as much. That would explain why I'm not getting too bad a creasing really, with my 18-year-old yoke.

    Anyone who takes out first time insurance with an old car, or who has a record of making claims, should expect heavy premiums.

    A driver who is with a company for a number of years, claim free, and who is driving the same car for those years should expect a relatively modest increase. The age of the car shouldn't really matter.

    On the subject of new car safety and insurance, a friend of mine recently traded in his 15 year old (trouble free) Yaris for one of those new hybrid Yaris models.
    His insurance doubled, no doubt caused by the increased CC's and value. Safety doesn't appear to have played any significant part in the increase.


  • Options
    #294
    Sue Pa Key Pa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,060 ✭✭✭Sue Pa Key Pa


    Iseedeadpixels wrote: »
    Sure loads of them were raided for price fixing recently, sounds dodgy enough to me.

    Another misconception of what happened.They were raided to ensure they were compliant with regulations not price fixing. Many of the offices involved were brokers, who have nothing to do with setting premiums


  • Options
    #295
    Iseedeadpixels
    Registered Users Posts: 4,026 ✭✭✭Iseedeadpixels


    Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »
    Another misconception of what happened.They were raided to ensure they were compliant with regulations not price fixing. Many of the offices involved were brokers, who have nothing to do with setting premiums

    Cmon take your head out of the sand.
    However, Brokers Ireland, which represents around 1,200 insurance brokers across the country says none of its members have reported any raids today.

    So it was brokers? Taken from RTE.


  • Options
    #296
    Sue Pa Key Pa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,060 ✭✭✭Sue Pa Key Pa


    Iseedeadpixels wrote: »
    Cmon take your head out of the sand.



    So it was brokers? Taken from RTE.

    Well, the Brokers that I work for were 'raided' and documents relating to compliance were examined (all in order thankfully). Is that good enough for you

    I presume that they mean the Irish Brokers Association, not Brokers Ireland, as I never heard of such an organisation.


  • Options
    #297
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users Posts: 8,172 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    So at the end of the day we are being ripped off by insurance companies.
    Has anyone got a sensible idea as to what can be done about it?


  • Options
    #298
    Sue Pa Key Pa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,060 ✭✭✭Sue Pa Key Pa


    realdanbreen wrote: »
    So at the end of the day we are being ripped off by insurance companies.
    Has anyone got a sensible idea as to what can be done about it?

    Rant at the wrong people seems to be the most popular proposal


  • Options
    #299
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users Posts: 8,172 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »
    Rant at the wrong people seems to be the most popular proposal

    I was looking for a sensible proposal, but thanks anyway.


  • Options
    #300
    Iseedeadpixels
    Registered Users Posts: 4,026 ✭✭✭Iseedeadpixels


    Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »
    Well, the Brokers that I work for were 'raided' and documents relating to compliance were examined (all in order thankfully). Is that good enough for you

    I presume that they mean the Irish Brokers Association, not Brokers Ireland, as I never heard of such an organisation.
    Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »
    Rant at the wrong people seems to be the most popular proposal

    Spoken like a true company man, I can see now why you're defending such price hikes.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #301
    Sue Pa Key Pa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,060 ✭✭✭Sue Pa Key Pa


    Iseedeadpixels wrote: »
    Spoken like a true company man, I can see now why you're defending such price hikes.

    I think the cost of insurance in Ireland is disgraceful and cannot be sustained at these levels. But everybody blaming insurers, in isolation, is ridiculous


Advertisement