Sunday Express Skeleton 24Th November...
Crosswords5 mins ago
Difference in Fully Comp and Third Party
I've just changed my car insurer after my previous insurer upped my premiums for no reason. I'm 45 years old with a petrol VW Golf, a clean licence and 9 years NCB. My previous insurer was Sabre and their Fully Comp. premium last year was �108. I've had no claims or changes but this year they just upped the premium to �145. When I rang up they told me that I'm paying for other people who have accidents. My argument is to charge them - not me!
I have now just purchased a Fully Comp policy with Ibuyeco who have charged me �90.15 for the year. I was happy with that but when I asked the lady out of interest how much a Third Party Fire and Theft policy was she quoted �142! That's �50 more than Fully Comp! I did ask why it was more expensive but I was so puzzled and surprised that I didn't really listen to the answer. It would be silly to call them back just to repeat the question.
Can someone please tell me why my Fully Comp policy is more expensive than Third Party F&T.?
I have now just purchased a Fully Comp policy with Ibuyeco who have charged me �90.15 for the year. I was happy with that but when I asked the lady out of interest how much a Third Party Fire and Theft policy was she quoted �142! That's �50 more than Fully Comp! I did ask why it was more expensive but I was so puzzled and surprised that I didn't really listen to the answer. It would be silly to call them back just to repeat the question.
Can someone please tell me why my Fully Comp policy is more expensive than Third Party F&T.?
Answers
1 to 4 of 4
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Andyvon. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Should that be why tpf&t is more expensive than comp (lol).
That's quite strange, but it may be simply to put off people insuring bangers (as they generally go for the lower level of cover? It would all come down to their underwriting criteria - the pricing systems (to the best of my knowedge although I deal with claims) is a serious of computer programmes that calculate the premium dependent on the details you provide - may just be a glitch in all honesty.
The price difference between these two levels of cover have been shrinking in recent years to reflect the rising costs of personal injury claims - insurers would still be liable on a fault claim, so we may as well get our money's worth!
In regards to paying for other people, this is sadly true - the number of uninsured drivers means that insurers have to pass the costs on elsewhere (basically to those who do insure their cars). It's a rubbish system, but until the police and DVLA pull their fingers out and start seriously collating info, and the courts start putting in prison, it'll just get worse.
That's quite strange, but it may be simply to put off people insuring bangers (as they generally go for the lower level of cover? It would all come down to their underwriting criteria - the pricing systems (to the best of my knowedge although I deal with claims) is a serious of computer programmes that calculate the premium dependent on the details you provide - may just be a glitch in all honesty.
The price difference between these two levels of cover have been shrinking in recent years to reflect the rising costs of personal injury claims - insurers would still be liable on a fault claim, so we may as well get our money's worth!
In regards to paying for other people, this is sadly true - the number of uninsured drivers means that insurers have to pass the costs on elsewhere (basically to those who do insure their cars). It's a rubbish system, but until the police and DVLA pull their fingers out and start seriously collating info, and the courts start putting in prison, it'll just get worse.
Thank you for your reply gouldc. It was very helpful and I do remember the lady saying something similar. I didn't listen to the explanation too carefully but it was along the lines you mention. I think she said that someone looking to insure a Golf on Third Party F&T cover is more likely to be a higher risk than someone who is looking for Fully Comp ( it's usually the younger drivers or those with convictions who insure Third Party).
As I said I was rather surprised that the Third Party F&T cover was so much more expensive than Fully Comp (�52). I'm certainly not complaining though. Years ago when I had two SP30s I was paying that a month! I learned to stick to the speed limit and it saved me a fortune.
I'm still a little miffed about paying for other people's accidents though. Why should those drivers who keep their noses clean be penalised? As it was I changed my insurer and found it was cheaper anyway so it all worked out well. Let's hope they sort the system out soon then.
Thanks again.
As I said I was rather surprised that the Third Party F&T cover was so much more expensive than Fully Comp (�52). I'm certainly not complaining though. Years ago when I had two SP30s I was paying that a month! I learned to stick to the speed limit and it saved me a fortune.
I'm still a little miffed about paying for other people's accidents though. Why should those drivers who keep their noses clean be penalised? As it was I changed my insurer and found it was cheaper anyway so it all worked out well. Let's hope they sort the system out soon then.
Thanks again.
I can understand that you are fed up paying for the mistakes of others, but that is the whole point of insurance.
If for example, you caused an accident tomorrow (and even the most careful drivers do) the cost could run into millions - which the majority of us couldn't afford to pay. But by paying into the 'pot' should the worst happen, you're covered. Also included in your premium is the damage caused by uninsured drivers (grr!) - don't get me started on that one! But on the whole, the premise of insurance is a pretty fair one (albeit increasingly expensive - along with everything else!)
As far as TPF&T being more expensive than fully comp, gouldc has raised a couple of good points. However, on the whole, insurance companies base the premiums on previous claims experience and statistics - so if the bean counters have logged that the risk of a claim and cost of a claim is higher with TPF&T policies then the premiums will reflect that - as illogical as it may seem.
If for example, you caused an accident tomorrow (and even the most careful drivers do) the cost could run into millions - which the majority of us couldn't afford to pay. But by paying into the 'pot' should the worst happen, you're covered. Also included in your premium is the damage caused by uninsured drivers (grr!) - don't get me started on that one! But on the whole, the premise of insurance is a pretty fair one (albeit increasingly expensive - along with everything else!)
As far as TPF&T being more expensive than fully comp, gouldc has raised a couple of good points. However, on the whole, insurance companies base the premiums on previous claims experience and statistics - so if the bean counters have logged that the risk of a claim and cost of a claim is higher with TPF&T policies then the premiums will reflect that - as illogical as it may seem.
Thanks JB - that makes sense too. I can see your point about the communal pot being there for any possible claims.
How on earth can they stop uninsured drivers though? I did hear that one in ten cars on the road aren't properly insured - if at all. That's a lot coming towards you every few minutes. Doesn't bear thinking about.
How on earth can they stop uninsured drivers though? I did hear that one in ten cars on the road aren't properly insured - if at all. That's a lot coming towards you every few minutes. Doesn't bear thinking about.
1 to 4 of 4
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.