Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to Anonymous,bruncher,niord,gvonge,Shelford, for Donating to support the site

car insurance NCB

Passion, instruction, buying, care, maintenance and more, any form of vehicle discussion is welcome here
Oggy
Lemon Slice
Posts: 632
Joined: November 28th, 2023, 10:26 am
Has thanked: 117 times
Been thanked: 389 times

Re: car insurance NCB

#663045

Postby Oggy » May 5th, 2024, 7:04 pm

bungeejumper wrote:
Lootman wrote:I had not thought about it historically either. Although my wife and I have always had 2 cars in 2 separate names and 2 separate insurance policies. So that if one of us got dinged with higher rates because of an accident or traffic offence, the other would not suffer.

That'll work just as long as neither of you is a named driver on the other's policy. As I found out about ten years ago, when my wife was peripherally involved in a multi-shunt caused entirely by an L-driver about five cars away from her.

My wife and her car were undamaged, and so were the cars immediately around her. Nobody for a single moment suggested that she was responsible for anything, and she didn't receive any communications at all about the matter. Ever!

But, about three months later, my car's insurer wrote me a furious letter, accusing me of concealing the fact that she had been involved in an accident in her own car. And cancelling MY NCB until such time as "her" accident claim had been resolved. (Sure enough, it was in the hands of somebody's battling solicitors......)

Believe it, word gets around pretty fast on the insurance claims database. And my own insurer had figured that this fault-free driver (my wife) was also a named driver on my own car's policy - and that that fact alone was sufficient reason to accuse me of concealing her "involvement in an accident claim". I can tell you, I drove pretty carefully for the next nine months, which was how long it took for the shambles to be resolved. :evil:

[Edit]: Meanwhile, my wife never received any warnings about any danger to her NCB. Or any formal notification that the case had been resolved. Or anything at all, in fact.I nstead, I had become the punchbag. :|

BJ


Did you expect them to treat you in a truly fair and civilized manner? If so, why? It's all about the money. The customer can go to blazes. Way of the world I'm afraid. Get used to it.

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10554
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3682 times
Been thanked: 5334 times

Re: car insurance NCB

#663089

Postby Arborbridge » May 6th, 2024, 7:31 am

bungeejumper wrote:
Lootman wrote:I had not thought about it historically either. Although my wife and I have always had 2 cars in 2 separate names and 2 separate insurance policies. So that if one of us got dinged with higher rates because of an accident or traffic offence, the other would not suffer.

That'll work just as long as neither of you is a named driver on the other's policy. As I found out about ten years ago, when my wife was peripherally involved in a multi-shunt caused entirely by an L-driver about five cars away from her.

My wife and her car were undamaged, and so were the cars immediately around her. Nobody for a single moment suggested that she was responsible for anything, and she didn't receive any communications at all about the matter. Ever!

But, about three months later, my car's insurer wrote me a furious letter, accusing me of concealing the fact that she had been involved in an accident in her own car. And cancelling MY NCB until such time as "her" accident claim had been resolved. (Sure enough, it was in the hands of somebody's battling solicitors......)

Believe it, word gets around pretty fast on the insurance claims database. And my own insurer had figured that this fault-free driver (my wife) was also a named driver on my own car's policy - and that that fact alone was sufficient reason to accuse me of concealing her "involvement in an accident claim". I can tell you, I drove pretty carefully for the next nine months, which was how long it took for the shambles to be resolved. :evil:

[Edit]: Meanwhile, my wife never received any warnings about any danger to her NCB. Or any formal notification that the case had been resolved. Or anything at all, in fact.I nstead, I had become the punchbag. :|

BJ


Something similar happened to me, but I must have been lucky - or insurance companies weren't so desperate to screw us all ten years ago. My wife was the victim of a shunt on the M23, but that had no effect on the policy on my own car on which she was named. At least, had no effect I knew of at the time.

I think Oggy's remarks tend to be abrasive rather than helpful. Perhaps a shortage of empathy, but I would have thought your moan is a very valid one - even insurance companies try to maintain some sort of logic to why they do things like load policies. The classic one is being scraped in a car park. Not your fault, but the loading (if it occurs at renewal) has some logic: your risk profile has, they would argue, risen.

Arb.

servodude
Lemon Half
Posts: 8524
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 4526 times
Been thanked: 3662 times

Re: car insurance NCB

#663098

Postby servodude » May 6th, 2024, 9:10 am

Arborbridge wrote:The classic one is being scraped in a car park. Not your fault, but the loading (if it occurs at renewal) has some logic: your risk profile has, they would argue, risen.


...It's only idiomatically that lightning never strikes twice :D

there's plenty of effort put in to make sure you can be pretty certain of where it's going to strike and to make it do so

bungeejumper
Lemon Half
Posts: 8239
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 2:30 pm
Has thanked: 2924 times
Been thanked: 4037 times

Re: car insurance NCB

#663102

Postby bungeejumper » May 6th, 2024, 9:40 am

servodude wrote:...It's only idiomatically that lightning never strikes twice :D

there's plenty of effort put in to make sure you can be pretty certain of where it's going to strike and to make it do so

Awkward, I know, but there's plenty of solid actuarial evidence that, if your name's Troy or Kaz or Duwayne, you're likely to have more accidents than other people. Car insurers used to get a lot of flak for loading premiums according to such unspoken socio-economic indicators. (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5896561 , for example.) I imagine they still do?

Apologies for wandering off-topic. This thread, of course, is primarily about NCBs, not premiums. :roll:

BJ

servodude
Lemon Half
Posts: 8524
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 4526 times
Been thanked: 3662 times

Re: car insurance NCB

#663105

Postby servodude » May 6th, 2024, 10:03 am

bungeejumper wrote:
servodude wrote:...It's only idiomatically that lightning never strikes twice :D

there's plenty of effort put in to make sure you can be pretty certain of where it's going to strike and to make it do so

Awkward, I know, but there's plenty of solid actuarial evidence that, if your name's Troy or Kaz or Duwayne, you're likely to have more accidents than other people. Car insurers used to get a lot of flak for loading premiums according to such unspoken socio-economic indicators. (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5896561 , for example.) I imagine they still do?

Apologies for wandering off-topic. This thread, of course, is primarily about NCBs, not premiums. :roll:

BJ


I think the thread has been moved out of "getting a slap for derailment" territory :D
Really tricky to pull apart the correlation and causes with this kind of stuff - and I imagine there's a big dose of Simpsons Paradox (especially if you don't adjust for geography effectively)

bungeejumper
Lemon Half
Posts: 8239
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 2:30 pm
Has thanked: 2924 times
Been thanked: 4037 times

Re: car insurance NCB

#663107

Postby bungeejumper » May 6th, 2024, 10:17 am

servodude wrote:Really tricky to pull apart the correlation and causes with this kind of stuff - and I imagine there's a big dose of Simpsons Paradox (especially if you don't adjust for geography effectively)

Thanks, I had to look that one up. It was worth it. :)

BJ

servodude
Lemon Half
Posts: 8524
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 4526 times
Been thanked: 3662 times

Re: car insurance NCB

#663109

Postby servodude » May 6th, 2024, 10:29 am

bungeejumper wrote:
servodude wrote:Really tricky to pull apart the correlation and causes with this kind of stuff - and I imagine there's a big dose of Simpsons Paradox (especially if you don't adjust for geography effectively)

Thanks, I had to look that one up. It was worth it. :)

BJ


Ooh it's a good one!
It's one of THOSE things, much like once you properly get Bayes Theorem, which makes you realise how crucial/important/influential any given sample set is (for good or ill)...
.. "something something" cars...
to bring us back on track (or the road really ;) )

chas49
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2030
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:25 am
Has thanked: 227 times
Been thanked: 481 times

Re: car insurance NCB

#663134

Postby chas49 » May 6th, 2024, 2:09 pm

Lootman wrote:I didn't bother with a claim either, and never reported the accident.


And how did you answer the question on your next renewal which said (something like) "Have you been involved in any accident (whether or not you were at fault) in the last 5 years"?

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 19215
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 650 times
Been thanked: 6825 times

Re: car insurance NCB

#663145

Postby Lootman » May 6th, 2024, 3:43 pm

chas49 wrote:
Lootman wrote:I didn't bother with a claim either, and never reported the accident.

And how did you answer the question on your next renewal which said (something like) "Have you been involved in any accident (whether or not you were at fault) in the last 5 years"?

This was around 1988 so I have no idea if that question was even asked. As best I recall my insurance routinely renewed.

But as I said, with no injury, no police involvement, no damage beyond my own vehicle and no action by the other party, the collision had no external impact. No claim was made and since I absorbed the loss myself I viewed the accident as not meaningfully reportable. And I have had no accident since then.

In fact the collision was fairly minor but the car was written off because the radiator was punctured and then the engine overheated and seized, making the car not worth repairing. And I have had no accident since then.

CliffEdge
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1566
Joined: July 25th, 2018, 9:56 am
Has thanked: 467 times
Been thanked: 435 times

Re: car insurance NCB

#663189

Postby CliffEdge » May 6th, 2024, 8:53 pm

The objective of the capitalist is to sell you absolutely nothing at the highest price possible.


Return to “Cars, Driving, Motorbikes or any Transport”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests