Couples car insurance

[Scouse]

Any recommendations?

Want to ensure we're both insured fully comp on both cars. Coming up at about £1200 at the mo from what I can find (though the bird has 6 points)...

 

[Moriath]

Mrs and me with direct line. About 450 for both of us fully comp on a 2014 passat and a 2014ish mini. She is main on the mini. Me on the passat. No points.

 

[Scouse]

Did it separately and saved 400 quid over what they were quoting from a few of the providers.

I don't think my missus' 6 points helped, but then I still managed to save a wadge.

 

[Job]

Talking of insurance..getting qoutes for father in law, hes 79, for a little Corsa, cheapest was 1200 quid..wtf.

So I put in his driver licence number because it can reduce premium.

370.
A third of the price once they can check your details...hmmmmm, that needs sorting out.

 

[Gwadien]

Talking of insurance..getting qoutes for father in law, hes 79, for a little Corsa, cheapest was 1200 quid..wtf.

So I put in his driver licence number because it can reduce premium.

370.
A third of the price once they can check your details...hmmmmm, that needs sorting out.

Isn't that exactly how it's meant to fucking work?

Do you want to pay more so that first time drivers pay the same amount as you too?

 

[Scouse]

I don't think it needs sorting out at all.

When you can prove you're not a risk by tgem being able to check you a) have a licence and b) aren't banned or full of endorsements then that's a fucking win.

Apart from cunts who can complain about that?

 

[Job]

The underlining problem is the trend towards penalties for not opening up your documents to corporations at point of sale.

It needs sorting because if lying to your insurance company in anyway affects 3rd parties then it should be compulsary, not at your discretion.

 

[Bodhi]

Wow, you mean a company accepting liability for someone's actions want additional proof they aren't a...well...a liability?

And this is news? Have you never hired a car in the UK before? As they use the exact same website to determine you aren't a fuckwit.

 

[Job]

You are missing my point.
They are using financial pressure to coerce you into handing over your driving licence.
They are basically saying we dont believe you about your convictions etc.
Im not sure if they are allowed to check from just the number.
Either its compulsary or they can fuck off, it needs sorting out, the government needs to enforce legislation now because the corporations are introducing their own laws as such.

 

[Bodhi]

You are missing my point.
They are using financial pressure to coerce you into handing over your driving licence.
They are basically saying we dont believe you about your convictions etc.
Im not sure if they are allowed to check from just the number.
Either its compulsary or they can fuck off, it needs sorting out, the government needs to enforce legislation now because the corporations are introducing their own laws as such.

No, they are doing what they can to assess the risk of offering you cover, and if you can prove you're a lower risk, you'll get cheaper cover.

I assume you understand the general concept of insurance yeah?

 

[Scouse]

You are missing my point.
They are using financial pressure to coerce you into handing over your driving licence.
They are basically saying we dont believe you about your convictions etc.
Im not sure if they are allowed to check from just the number.
Either its compulsary or they can fuck off, it needs sorting out, the government needs to enforce legislation now because the corporations are introducing their own laws as such.

1) What @Bodhi said and;

2) Even if you had a point (which you don't) - pick your fights? Why would you NOT want to hand over your drivers licence number when getting car insurance?

Why would you NOT want to prove A) that you've got a licence and B) that you're not a liability.

It doesn't need to be mandatory - because if you're enough of a dick to not to actually want to hand over these details when buying insurance then you deserve to pay more - simply for being such a twat.

 

[Job]

It goes beyond their finances, innocent third parties have their payouts put at risk by insurance fraud...which is what it is.
It should not be down to corporations to fine you into not breaking the law.
A typical grey area of insurance, the law states 3rd parties are paid out regardless, but passengers in the offenders car can face huge legal battles.
the dvla should automatically give the information by law, and there should be no cop out considering the consequences.
I know someone who got insurance after drink driving and didnt tell them.
He got away with it..it needs sorting out.

 

[Job]

1) What @Bodhi said and;

2) Even if you had a point (which you don't) - pick your fights? Why would you NOT want to hand over your drivers licence number when getting car insurance?

Why would you NOT want to prove A) that you've got a licence and B) that you're not a liability.

It doesn't need to be mandatory - because if you're enough of a dick to not to actually want to hand over these details when buying insurance then you deserve to pay more - simply for being such a twat.

Actually the online forms states some insurance companies offer cheaper rates if you hand over your licence number...which is all very whatever.

 

[Scouse]

Actually the online forms states some insurance companies offer cheaper rates if you hand over your licence number...which is all very whatever.

It's a risk business, right? You understand that?

People who don't want to hand over their drivers licence number - therefore proving that they're less of a risk of being an utter cockwomble - are bigger risks.

Bigger risk = more money.

Simple.

 

[Scouse]

I know someone who got insurance after drink driving and didnt tell them.
He got away with it..it needs sorting out.

Dob him in. He's a cunt, a drink driver and a fraudster.

And a cunt.

 

[Gwadien]

I know someone who got insurance after drink driving and didnt tell them.
He got away with it..it needs sorting out.

Surely that means insurance companies should have access to our criminal records too?

 

[Scouse]

Surely that means insurance companies should have access to our criminal records too?

The thing is - if he's in a crash, and he kills someone, you can bet your bottom dollar that the insurance company will do an investigation - and find he's clearly lied.

If you lie when you take out insurance, your insurance is null and void - therefore he's un-insured.

Surprise surprise @Job knows someone that's driving around un-insured. And if his mate kills someone then @Job will be moaning about how it's the governments fault that it failed to make it mandatory for his cunt of a mate to be honest - when Job has a moral duty to either A) convince his mate to talk to his insurance company and tell them the truth or B) dob the cunt in.

Job - you're more at fault that your mate is driving uninsured than the government is.

 

[Job]

Well theres the grey area..hes still covered third party..thats the law, regardless of how you lie.
And hes not my mate, just an idiot in the pub.
And now the insurance companies are putting pressure on people to prove their risk, because they are not getting enough premiums to cover the risk if people fib and Im pretty sure a lot of people do.
It should be an anonymous risk factor from the dvla...firstly to sure you actually have a licence, then a risk number based on your convictions that covers their potential losses.
As I said in my first post..it needs sorting out in law, not companies twisting arms.

 

[Scouse]

There's no grey area - he's not covered. Third parties get a payout from the public purse, sometimes, but not in the same way as when people are properly insured.

And as he's an idiot in the pub, even better, dob the criminal wanker in.

 

[Gwadien]

Surprise surprise @Job knows someone that's driving around un-insured. And if his mate kills someone then @Job will be moaning about how it's the governments fault that it failed to make it mandatory for his cunt of a mate to be honest - when Job has a moral duty to either A) convince his mate to talk to his insurance company and tell them the truth or B) dob the cunt in.

I bet you £10 he shares the same political views as @Job

 

[dysfunction]

Well theres the grey area..hes still covered third party..thats the law, regardless of how you lie.
And hes not my mate, just an idiot in the pub.
And now the insurance companies are putting pressure on people to prove their risk, because they are not getting enough premiums to cover the risk if people fib and Im pretty sure a lot of people do.
It should be an anonymous risk factor from the dvla...firstly to sure you actually have a licence, then a risk number based on your convictions that covers their potential losses.
As I said in my first post..it needs sorting out in law, not companies twisting arms.

Are you actually listening to yourself?

If you lie to the insurance company they take on more risk which means they incur more claims making them lose money.

In order to stop losing money they
A) increase premiums
B) DO more checks to ensure you are not lying.

What's so hard to understand about that? ?

 

[Moriath]

Well theres the grey area..hes still covered third party..thats the law, regardless of how you lie.
And hes not my mate, just an idiot in the pub.
And now the insurance companies are putting pressure on people to prove their risk, because they are not getting enough premiums to cover the risk if people fib and Im pretty sure a lot of people do.
It should be an anonymous risk factor from the dvla...firstly to sure you actually have a licence, then a risk number based on your convictions that covers their potential losses.
As I said in my first post..it needs sorting out in law, not companies twisting arms.

No grey area. Uninsured as they will cancel it as soon as they find out. Anyone affected by him in an accident could sue him. Though i guess he has no money.

Theywould have to rely on their own insurance or get the money from him.

Ffs @Job report the fucker.

 

[Job]

It was about five years ago ffs, he was telling us what he did to get insured after the conviction, still uses the no claims though, just moved insurance companies after enough time passed for him to get real insurance cheap enough.
Another grey area, is his no claims valid if he frauded to get the cover.
Will his new insurance company trace back to see if hes been paying higher premiums since getting his licence back.
Maybe..
As I say it needs sorting out, too many ways to cheat the system, too many holes in the legislation that is being filled by insurance companies own 'laws'.
It wouldnt matter if it was about the price of cheese, its just another example of the insurance industries power, they use these grey areas to escape payouts, knowing its easy to lie, they basically push people into doing so with eye watering premiums.

The fact is..
Insurance is compulsary but proving you are not lying through your teeth to get it and invalidating it isnt.

Thats a bit of a joke.

 

[Scouse]

Another grey area, is his no claims valid if he frauded to get the cover.
Will his new insurance company trace back to see if hes been paying higher premiums since getting his licence back.
Maybe..
As I say it needs sorting out, too many ways to cheat the system, too many holes in the legislation that is being filled by insurance companies own 'laws'.
It wouldnt matter if it was about the price of cheese, its just another example of the insurance industries power, they use these grey areas to escape payouts, knowing its easy to lie, they basically push people into doing so with eye watering premiums.

The fact is..
Insurance is compulsary but proving you are not lying through your teeth to get it and invalidating it isnt.

Thats a bit of a joke.

You fucking idiot.

Companies do, and should, conduct business on the presumption that their customers aren't lying scum. That is perfectly fine for the vast majority of their customers - who answer all the questions honestly and truthfully.

There are massive red flag signs up saying "if you are lying, then your insurance is not only invalid - but you may well be comitting a criminal offence".

That's not a grey area. That's the hard and fast rule. If you lie, then your insurance is invalid - all of it. Totally. Including your fucking no claims bonus.

All. Of. It.

No grey area at all. And to top it all they are completely honest, up front and transparent about this *before* you spend your money with them. And when you do hand over your cash you confirm you're not a lying cunt.

When you make a claim the company, rightly, tries to confirm you're not one of these lying scumbags - they know that 95÷ of its customers are lovely, but they spend an inordinate amount of their profits trying to find these lying scumbags. This pushes premiums way higher for all of us.

So, lying scumbags are stealing from you and me by making our insurance more expensive.

AND - you A) hate government databases and B) don't want the government to share that data with companies but to combat this you C) want government to make it a legal requirement to share their databases with these companies?

You're a walking intellectual disaster.

No - the entire responsibility for not acting in a decent and truthful manner lies on the scumbags shoulders.

I've never had a single problem getting paid out by any insurance company for anything - including a very expensive bike left temporarily unattended (though locked) whilst I was on holiday in the US. The reason for that is that I'm honest, truthful and provide them with all they evidence they ask for in a timely manner, with no bullshit.

These aren't big horrible companies trying to get out of paying what they owe - if you are honest and provide what they ask then they pay out promptly with no hassle - and that is the experience of my family and friends who are honest and don't try to game them.

It's scum, and people who mix with scum, who have a problem with their very clear, very obvious and honestly stated rules.

No ifs, no buts, play by the rules and they pose no problem whatsoever. Cunts will be cunts though.

 

[Access Denied]

You fucking idiot.

Companies do, and should, conduct business on the presumption that their customers aren't lying scum. That is perfectly fine for the vast majority of their customers - who answer all the questions honestly and truthfully.

There are massive red flag signs up saying "if you are lying, then your insurance is not only invalid - but you may well be comitting a criminal offence".

That's not a grey area. That's the hard and fast rule. If you lie, then your insurance is invalid - all of it. Totally. Including your fucking no claims bonus.

All. Of. It.

No grey area at all. And to top it all they are completely honest, up front and transparent about this *before* you spend your money with them. And when you do hand over your cash you confirm you're not a lying cunt.

When you make a claim the company, rightly, tries to confirm you're not one of these lying scumbags - they know that 95÷ of its customers are lovely, but they spend an inordinate amount of their profits trying to find these lying scumbags. This pushes premiums way higher for all of us.

So, lying scumbags are stealing from you and me by making our insurance more expensive.

AND - you A) hate government databases and B) don't want the government to share that data with companies but to combat this you C) want government to make it a legal requirement to share their databases with these companies?

You're a walking intellectual disaster.

No - the entire responsibility for not acting in a decent and truthful manner lies on the scumbags shoulders.

I've never had a single problem getting paid out by any insurance company for anything - including a very expensive bike left temporarily unattended (though locked) whilst I was on holiday in the US. The reason for that is that I'm honest, truthful and provide them with all they evidence they ask for in a timely manner, with no bullshit.

These aren't big horrible companies trying to get out of paying what they owe - if you are honest and provide what they ask then they pay out promptly with no hassle - and that is the experience of my family and friends who are honest and don't try to game them.

It's scum, and people who mix with scum, who have a problem with their very clear, very obvious and honestly stated rules.

No ifs, no buts, play by the rules and they pose no problem whatsoever. Cunts will be cunts though.

I agree with almost everything you've said there. However insurance companies are infamous for finding any and all ways to avoid paying out. I've experienced this myself. 10 years ago the ex and I had our car stolen from a car park. I was totally honest and told them that while the car was locked, the spare key was in the glove box. Despite the fact that the glove box was shut (And therefore the key wasn't visible) they decided that the key being in the car at all aided in the theft and refused to pay out. Everything else you said is totally correct but I do think there should be more legislation to stop them squirming out of their responsibilities.

 

[Job]

You fucking idiot.

Companies do, and should, conduct business on the presumption that their customers aren't lying scum. That is perfectly fine for the vast majority of their customers - who answer all the questions honestly and truthfully.

There are massive red flag signs up saying "if you are lying, then your insurance is not only invalid - but you may well be comitting a criminal offence".

That's not a grey area. That's the hard and fast rule. If you lie, then your insurance is invalid - all of it. Totally. Including your fucking no claims bonus.

All. Of. It.

No grey area at all. And to top it all they are completely honest, up front and transparent about this *before* you spend your money with them. And when you do hand over your cash you confirm you're not a lying cunt.

When you make a claim the company, rightly, tries to confirm you're not one of these lying scumbags - they know that 95÷ of its customers are lovely, but they spend an inordinate amount of their profits trying to find these lying scumbags. This pushes premiums way higher for all of us.

So, lying scumbags are stealing from you and me by making our insurance more expensive.

AND - you A) hate government databases and B) don't want the government to share that data with companies but to combat this you C) want government to make it a legal requirement to share their databases with these companies?

You're a walking intellectual disaster.

No - the entire responsibility for not acting in a decent and truthful manner lies on the scumbags shoulders.

I've never had a single problem getting paid out by any insurance company for anything - including a very expensive bike left temporarily unattended (though locked) whilst I was on holiday in the US. The reason for that is that I'm honest, truthful and provide them with all they evidence they ask for in a timely manner, with no bullshit.

These aren't big horrible companies trying to get out of paying what they owe - if you are honest and provide what they ask then they pay out promptly with no hassle - and that is the experience of my family and friends who are honest and don't try to game them.

It's scum, and people who mix with scum, who have a problem with their very clear, very obvious and honestly stated rules.

No ifs, no buts, play by the rules and they pose no problem whatsoever. Cunts will be cunts though.

Can you even get into your head what Im saying..just reread my post and youll find you are agreeing with me.
I'm saying it has to be the law because its too important to be left to the discretion and arm bending of insurance companies.
Im pretty sure if they ran an insurance application database against the dvla's databas...which would take like an afternoon, there would be at least 10% of discrepencies, all of them potentially invalidating insurance.

You just went on a big rant on how honest you are so theres no problem.
That just sums up your armchair liberal attitude, Im not personally involved, so its just fine.
So when you get mowed down by a driver who lied to get his insurance and you end up trolling through the courts to get a payout, you wont be banging on the door of compulsary dvla checks, youre all for it at the roadside by the police, but the databases dont look into convictions..its a joke.
You could have 3 dui's 10 points all undeclared but the copper would be like ..nonprobs your insured.
What a farce.

 

[Scouse]

I agree with almost everything you've said there. However insurance companies are infamous for finding any and all ways to avoid paying out. I've experienced this myself. 10 years ago the ex and I had our car stolen from a car park. I was totally honest and told them that while the car was locked, the spare key was in the glove box.

You silly tit.

Harsh lesson. Your fault.

It was written in your t&c. It's reasonable. You made a boob. Not "insurance company wriggling", it's "silly person did bad".