Can I please have some clarification from the collective.
Wife has her main daily driver which she has full no claims on.
Then we want to get a car which will be my sons when he is 17. In the meantime wife will also use this car and insure it in her name until he is 17,
then it will be insured in his name.
So basically she then owns and insures two vehicles, the insurance being with two separate insurance companies.
So,
Where do you stand with regard to no claims accrued on the daily driver ? Can they be used on the 2nd policy on the 2nd car when that company asks
for NC history. Is it true you can not have two cars insured like this and use your previous no claims history on both vehicles ?
Just trying to settle a little debate at work. I am sure with our kitcars, our previous driving insurance history gets taken into account ?
Your history is taken into account in terms of assessing your risk (i.e. no fault accidents in the last 3/5 years), but the NCD can only be applied to
one car. You can have a second NCD on a second car if you build it up separately.
That said, there are some companies who may give you an initial NCD based on the fact that you have some on another vehicle (or were a named driver on
another vehicle), but this is not usually transferrable to another company.
NCD is not usually applied to kit cars at all, as they are typically on limited-use policies.
As said above a built up NCB can only be used on 1 policy, but there are some insurances companies that will do a multi car policy, or give a discount
for insuring a second car with them.
The 2 that I know of are direct line and admiral, Admiral do a multi car policy and direct line will give you a discount if you already have a main
policy with them.
Cheers guys,
Just surprising with all the online quotes I have never seen anything like -
"is your NCD from a previous or closed policy?" (ie not currently running)
They seem to have a tick box for everything else but not this. I reckon there are loads of people out there using "one" accrued NCD on more
than one vehicle.
[Edited on 13/3/14 by karlak]
They may be. Likewise you could say your son is 25 and has 7 years ncb.
If you are lucky you may get away with it. However, people tend to get caught out when there is a claim, and the ins co actually bothers to check out
your application.
use multicar
I've just had this very argument as I have two cars but have generally insured them alternately. I have >15 years NCB (though no-one will recognise it past 9) but when I came to do a new quote for both at the same time they were not willing to use the NCB on both cars so I was getting quoted more for a 306 diesel estate than I get quoted for a '91 Celica GT4 with heavy modification. I argued with the chap for about 10 minutes and then said "well I was willing to buy it now and pay outright but if you're not willing to mirror my NCB onto this policy I'll find someone who is", at which point he offered to mirror the 9 years and cut the policy premium in half. And I will now ensure I keep track of the NCB on both cars!
This is my biggest beef with motor insurance. Until recently I had 3 cars. All insured separately, and two with max NCD. If I have an accident in
one car I have to tell the insurance companies when I renew, and they will load my premium, even if the claim is not on the police I hold with
them.
The same applies if you have a speeding offence, you have to declare it to all insurers, not just the one covering the car you were driving when the
(theoretical) offence was committed.
So as things stand anything negative in your driving profile will be taken into account on every policy you have, but anything positive, like 45 years
claim free in my case, will only be taken into account on one policy. I really get angry about this. the insurance companies want everything weighted
to their benefit.
Rant over, except to say I had a multicar policy with Aviva until a few months ago when I sold my Lotus The total premium was much lower than any of
the usual multi car policy providers.
So, they wont relate the two policies for accruing and gaining NCD. But, if you have an accident on one of the policies, then it will effect the
premium on both. Another example of insurance companies both having their cake and eating it.
Also, from above, it seems they can waiver this "rule" if they so wish, disgusting....
On a very slight tangent, can you insure Kitcar using a multicar policy or is it best to keep Kitcar with a specialist?
Thanks
It's a disgrace really.
I do think that the the third party part of insurance should be available from a non-profit organisation (such as the government) since it is a legal
requirement. The rest on top is optional, it's fine that that is done by commercial entities.
The problem with NCB, as partially mentioned, is that it's total nonsense. Some companies recognise more than others, protected NCB won't
stop them loading your premium if you crash, it just protects the number of no claims years you have which means nothing when you also admit a
crash.
Non-cost, non-fault accidents increase premiums - WTF?
The whole industry is bent, and relies on hidden formulae with no base i reality.
[Edited on 13/3/14 by coyoteboy]
quote:
Originally posted by FazerBob
This is my biggest beef with motor insurance. Until recently I had 3 cars. All insured separately, and two with max NCD. If I have an accident in one car I have to tell the insurance companies when I renew, and they will load my premium, even if the claim is not on the police I hold with them.
The same applies if you have a speeding offence, you have to declare it to all insurers, not just the one covering the car you were driving when the (theoretical) offence was committed.
Like Fazer bob
had the same situation.
Can this be legal I would really like to know ?
or legalised robbery !
Have 3 policies 1 small accident now will get penalised by the other 2.
You can't argue that your good behaviour should be shared over all but bad behaviour only affects one.
It's perfectly logical, however, to accept both should be applied to all policies, and if you pay a premium to protect a status that should
mean that status should remain intact and unblemished if the protection is used. Otherwise you're paying for nothing, which is selling a product
that doesn't work.
Freebie 3rd party seems to be a nightmare. It exists in Australia and probably other places. But only covers injury. So a 17yo scroat buys a fast car,
smashes it up and destroys yours. You have to sue him for damages. That is a nightmare.....
Agree ncb should be on driver. But insurance is worked out on stats. If you are involved in a no fault claim, stats show you are more likely to be
involved in more claims. Guess those people are often a bit more careless?
As to protected ncb, people misunderstand it. Of course your premium will go up after an accident. Only fair, you are a higher risk. But there is the
double whammy of ncb loss.
Likewise, of course if you have an accident it will affect all your policies. You are a higher risk. If additional drivers have an accident, and you
take them off, seems a more difficult one.
There's no reason the government provided (not free just not profir based) has to be only 3rd party injury alone.
Stats can be manipulated however you like, and who provides the stats? If it's not an independent party doing the stats properly they might as
well be making it up. In theory the longer you go without a crash the more likely you are to have a crash by basic probability but they don't
load for that. As for people in a non fault claim, how can you possibly claim they are more careless? That makes absolutely no sense.
I understand ncb perfectly but the way it is marketed and sold is not fair to those who are maybe not smart enough to think through the reality of the
protection they are buying. It's a blank cheque for them and they ride it all the way to the bank.
quote:
Originally posted by cliftyhangerIf you are involved in a no fault claim, stats show you are more likely to be involved in more claims. Guess those people are often a bit more careless?