• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

car insurance prices

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bikeman78

Established Member
Joined
26 Apr 2018
Messages
5,398
It's hardly rocket science, you've literally inputted an underwriter's nightmare scenario.

Over 50, in Hertfordshire, SDP+ Commuting, good NCB, 5 year old Golf = £270.
That's about the same as mine. Mine dropped nearly a hundred quid last year, having been around £350 for a few years. A pleasant surprise.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
11,092
Funnily enough I put my partner onto my insurance an in spite of a £20 admin fee, I got a £10 refund!
Same for me, I got the periodic renewal quote, and asked for Mrs T to be added. New quote was less. I said to the agent I should have six wives. She replied I would never be able to manage them all ...

Fact is the underwriters know their numbers, the claims history from single males, and the history from those married sharing a single car. Whatever the historic figures show them, that's what they go on.
 

Ken H

Established Member
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
6,582
Location
N Yorks
shop around different comparison sites. They all use different underwriting engines and inputs. Actuaries may rate postcodes and cars differently.
Before you buy a car, check how iaffects insurance premiums. Evena change in trim can affect the price. Avoid anything 'boy racer' or that may be attractive to car theives.
Fully comp with an excess thats greater than yuor car value will often be cheaper than TPFT
Insurance premiums will be affected by your postcode. May be cheaper to pay more rent to get cheaper premiums.
and yes, age, mileage and use does affect premiums. as does where you say you keep your car.
and avoid getting motoring convictions...
 

Bikeman78

Established Member
Joined
26 Apr 2018
Messages
5,398
Fact is the underwriters know their numbers, the claims history from single males, and the history from those married sharing a single car. Whatever the historic figures show them, that's what they go on.
Doesn't always work out though. In the 13 years I've known my now ex wife, she has pranged the car three times (all minor bumps, nothing serious). I've not hit anything. Her mum is considerably worse. Every car she has owned has ended up in a scrapyard!
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
103,855
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Doesn't always work out though. In the 13 years I've known my now ex wife, she has pranged the car three times (all minor bumps, nothing serious). I've not hit anything. Her mum is considerably worse. Every car she has owned has ended up in a scrapyard!

I suspect it is the case that men have fewer but more serious accidents that overall cost more due to personal injury claims. Most minor parking bumps and scrapes cost a couple of grand to fix at worst.
 

DelW

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2015
Messages
4,688
Same for me, I got the periodic renewal quote, and asked for Mrs T to be added. New quote was less. I said to the agent I should have six wives. She replied I would never be able to manage them all ...

Fact is the underwriters know their numbers, the claims history from single males, and the history from those married sharing a single car. Whatever the historic figures show them, that's what they go on.
It can work the other way too. A few years ago a female friend added me to her insurance so we could share the driving when going on holiday together (she declined to drive my car) and received about a £20 rebate. She's kept me on the policy ever since!
(I do occasionally still drive it since if we go out for social events we alternate who drives back).
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
23,934
Location
LBK
I look for car insurance prices from time to time to see the affordability of a cheap car to me. Last year I entered my information and got £972 as the cheapest quote for a third-party, fire and theft insurance on a fully-depreciated used car with low tax and small power. As I have recently moved and some circumstances changed, I have tried quoting again, and the price skyrocketed, with the cheapest quote now £1714 and there is no way a car is affordable to normal people except the super rich at such premium.
£1714 is not for the "super rich", I had insurance of £1300 pa when I first passed and I was living in a bedsit.

I wonder what the circumstances are those people who get cheap car insurance, for example, in the low hundreds.
36, secure off road parking, 16 years no claims, no points, full UK licence for 16 years, small, 1L VW car. £397 pa.
 

miklcct

On Moderation
Joined
2 May 2021
Messages
4,920
Location
Cricklewood
£1714 is not for the "super rich", I had insurance of £1300 pa when I first passed and I was living in a bedsit.
£1714 was two year worth of transport when I lived in Hong Kong, and at least 9 months of transport.

When the insurance alone already costs 9 months of public transport usage, I can't see how it isn't a luxury.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
31,977
£1714 was two year worth of transport when I lived in Hong Kong, and at least 9 months of transport.

When the insurance alone already costs 9 months of public transport usage, I can't see how it isn't a luxury.

Welcome to the U.K., where different norms apply.
 

Bikeman78

Established Member
Joined
26 Apr 2018
Messages
5,398
£1714 is not for the "super rich", I had insurance of £1300 pa when I first passed and I was living in a bedsit.
I'm glad I didn't bother driving until my 30s. I could buy a new bike every four months for that money.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
23,934
Location
LBK
£1714 was two year worth of transport when I lived in Hong Kong, and at least 9 months of transport.

When the insurance alone already costs 9 months of public transport usage, I can't see how it isn't a luxury.
Of course you can’t, but that is the reality here. The vast majority of people have access to a car, and can drive. Even people like me who lived in a bedsit at age 20 earning £20,000 a year.

Driving was by far the most sensible choice for me. I had to drive to work, and having a car got me access to a much wider social circle. £1300 was a very high amount to pay as a new driver but it was worth it.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
28,953
Location
Redcar
£1300 was a very high amount to pay as a new driver but it was worth it.
And if your experience was anything like mine it plummeted rapidly. My first year was also about £1,300 but the second year (after shopping around!) was about £700 and the the third year something like £500 and it's slowly continued to fall until it's reached the £265 I paid last year. The first years insurance can be brutal but, unless you actually have an accident, it quickly drops off to something much more affordable.
 

DelW

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2015
Messages
4,688
£1714 was two year worth of transport when I lived in Hong Kong, and at least 9 months of transport.

When the insurance alone already costs 9 months of public transport usage, I can't see how it isn't a luxury.
If something is essential for your work then it isn't a luxury. I'm sure there are still plenty of rail commuters paying way more than £1714 for their season tickets.

As for having to be "super rich" to afford that, it's a trivial amount in the context of what it costs to run the kind of cars that the super-rich buy and drive.
 

duncombec

Member
Joined
3 Sep 2014
Messages
936
Rural Kent for me means those parts of Kent outside the Greater London built-up area.

I have started using this term after reading the description of Kent County Amateur Swimming Association:



The former association (in the Greater London built-up area) belongs to the London Region and the latter association belongs to the South East region.

Worth saying that this is not a distinction anybody I know would use. I'd suggest very little of Kent considers itself against London, but against the rest of the county - and having towns and cities with a population close-to or exceeding 100,000 would definitely be considered urban, not only by the population, but by an insurance firm as well.

Insurance firms will have a huge amount of background data on the area, which is how they make their quotes. If a truly rural area (think 50 houses and fields) has had a particular crimewave recently, prices will be higher however idyllic it looks. Likewise, an urban area does not necessarily mean higher prices just because it looks a little down at heel - even the smartest neighbourhood could be a risk if there is nightlife in the area and the risk of damage on a Friday night if you on-street park.
To take one example locally, a regular street a mile or so away from the town centre, nothing particularly out of the ordinary ever happens except the odd prang... a party got out of hand, and the police had to be called to stop "youths" damaging cars, not least by walking over them and climbing on the bonnets and roofs. Numerous dents and smashed glass. Will there be a minor premium increase for all houses in the area next year? Maybe it might be considered a one-off and no, maybe it will invoke an increase, at least for the year.

As others have done across many threads, I strongly suggest you visit somewhere and get a feel for the place, rather than trying to draw random conclusions based on clicking around on a website with an incorrect starting premise!

If something is essential for your work then it isn't a luxury. I'm sure there are still plenty of rail commuters paying way more than £1714 for their season tickets.
(Hopefully this will automerge, I can't see how to add a second quote in post edit)

This is the key point: it's what you determine to be a luxury. Some need a car to go about their business, so will opt for a car over travelling around the country to engage in enjoyable, but arguably unnecessary, sporting activities. By contrast, the OP places high value on those activities, so for him, they are the greater importance, although this has to be balanced over difficulties of getting there without the private transport. In further contrast, there are others for whom both a car and the activities are absolute luxuries.

I have, so far, chosen not to drive and accepted time penalties as a result because I'm mainly travelling for leisure nowadays. Would that still be the case if I hadn't spent life working in London and then from home? I hate to say it, but probably not.
 
Last edited:

antharro

Member
Joined
20 Dec 2006
Messages
674
The idea of doing 27000 miles in a car that small would fill me with dread. My first car was a VW Polo which was a great little car, but not cut out for regular long distance driving. The older I've got, the more I've enjoyed having bigger and more comfortable cars. My current Lexus is one of the most comfortable cars I've ever driven, and I could quite happily drive long distances regularly in it. A C1 or similar car is fine for driving around town and the occasional long distance trip, but given your use case, you may want to look at a slightly larger vehicle; something like a Golf, Polo or Astra. If you go for a smaller engine, base spec, you may be surprised to find the difference in premium isn't as huge as you might thing it would be.

As for your insurance prices... you have a bad combination of high mileage, living in London, business use, not being a UK resident for most of your life, age and lack of NCB. It's going to be expensive. Sure, it was cheaper in Hong Kong but you're not in Hong Kong now. The UK is more expensive in many ways and this is one of them. If you want to drive then you pay the price. If you don't then you don't. It's your choice.

On the public transport vs car discussion, why not split between both. Sometimes I drive to London, sometimes I get the train, sometimes I get the coach. It depends on what I'm doing as which is the most appropriate. They all have their advantages and disadvantages.
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
8,063
Location
West Wiltshire
Mine went down when I replaced a 2 year old on a lease with a new car (which I had bought), even though the new car had a list price of £24k vs old cars list price of about £17k.

So a new, more powerful car cost less to insure, and I got rebate on the balance of the years premium.
 

miklcct

On Moderation
Joined
2 May 2021
Messages
4,920
Location
Cricklewood
On the public transport vs car discussion, why not split between both. Sometimes I drive to London, sometimes I get the train, sometimes I get the coach. It depends on what I'm doing as which is the most appropriate. They all have their advantages and disadvantages.
I am trying to reduce my spending by as much as I can, without reducing the amount of activities I do, while I am building my business and I don't want to buy a car and also pay extortionate train fares.
This is the key point: it's what you determine to be a luxury. Some need a car to go about their business, so will opt for a car over travelling around the country to engage in enjoyable, but arguably unnecessary, sporting activities. By contrast, the OP places high value on those activities, so for him, they are the greater importance, although this has to be balanced over difficulties of getting there without the private transport. In further contrast, there are others for whom both a car and the activities are absolute luxuries.
I am happy to pay, let's say, £15-£20 for a typical sports race every week. However, if I need to pay an additional £30 or more in transport to get there and back I won't be happy at all unless it's for a high level race.

In the whole of 2022, counting all my public transport on land in the UK, I have travelled 30785 km and paid £2747 in fares, i.e. 8.9p / km. At 150p / L on 6L / 100 km the fuel cost alone, £2771, will cost more than the public transport fare already.

I moved from the country to London at the beginning of June. In the first 5 months alone I already logged 18925 km on land public transport while in the remaining 7 months living in London I only logged 11860 km. Which means, if I actually lived in the country for a year, I would likely need 45420 km (28388 miles), which meant even 27000 miles may even be an underestimate for my car if I really live in the country.
 

Ken H

Established Member
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
6,582
Location
N Yorks
One thing actuaries hate is desirable motors. A 5 yr old skoda may have a lower premium than an equivalent VW.
Some insurers credit check proposers. Lack of a credit record may sound bells. Get a credit card and pay off the balance by direct debit monthly. 3 or 4 on time payments may improve your score.
Careful buying extras. Motor legal protection is a rip off. Breakdown may be cheaper bought separately. Or get a bank accoubt with free breakdown. Lloyds bank do those.
Check out how much they are charging for paying installments. May be cheaper buying elsewhere.

Insurance quotes are calculated by computer. It gets the price for the car, then adds or subtracts a percentage or money value based on how the questions are answered. Of course you have to do the calcs in the right order.
Insurers will change the settings to quote high premiums to balance their risk portfolio. So try on many comparison sites.
 

antharro

Member
Joined
20 Dec 2006
Messages
674
I am trying to reduce my spending by as much as I can, without reducing the amount of activities I do, while I am building my business and I don't want to buy a car and also pay extortionate train fares.

Right. So don't plan on doing all of your travelling on one mode of transport. Reduce the amount of miles you're doing in the car, save a lot on the insurance and give yourself the flexibility (and money) to use other forms of transport.
 

skyhigh

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2014
Messages
6,315
I moved from the country to London at the beginning of June. In the first 5 months alone I already logged 18925 km on land public transport while in the remaining 7 months living in London I only logged 11860 km. Which means, if I actually lived in the country for a year, I would likely need 45420 km (28388 miles), which meant even 27000 miles may even be an underestimate for my car if I really live in the country.
It's a complete nonsense to be so binary about your usage. I have a car yet I still walk, cycle and travel by train/bus.

You might find something like ByMiles interesting - you pay a base fee, then per mile on top. So if you travel less, you pay less. At least then you can actually see that you've saved money on your insurance by taking the train if required.
 

RailWonderer

Established Member
Joined
25 Jul 2018
Messages
1,946
Location
All around the network
What's the best card to get to build credit score when I have no income?
Two months of pay and you can get a bank loan for a car. Hard to build anything unless you pay for small things monthly like a phone bill for example. Pay that monthly and you will build credit. Same principle for anyone moving country starting a credit record from scratch. Humble brag but I mostly pay for things cash and save so I didn't have one myself.
 

ABB125

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2016
Messages
3,996
Location
University of Birmingham
Two months of pay and you can get a bank loan for a car. Hard to build anything unless you pay for small things monthly like a phone bill for example. Pay that monthly and you will build credit. Same principle for anyone moving country starting a credit record from scratch. Humble brag but I mostly pay for things cash and save so I didn't have one myself.
You say that, but I had a look at my credit score (first time) using one of the free online providers about a year ago. Bearing in mind that I:
  • Am a student
  • Have no phone contract
  • Had almost zero expenditure prior to university, and most of that was cash
It came back as something like 996 out of 1000. Which I was somewhat surprised by!
 

skyhigh

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2014
Messages
6,315
You say that, but I had a look at my credit score (first time) using one of the free online providers about a year ago. Bearing in mind that I:
  • Am a student
  • Have no phone contract
  • Had almost zero expenditure prior to university, and most of that was cash
It came back as something like 996 out of 1000. Which I was somewhat surprised by!
The number is effectively meaningless and isn't considered by financial institutions when making decisions. They instead look at the factors such as time at address, credit utilisation, missed payments etc.
 

Zamracene749

Member
Joined
11 Dec 2005
Messages
875
Location
East Durham
Be aware- established knowledge is that you need a small, inexpensive runabout type car to keep insurance costs low.
This is no longer the case.

You can save money on insurance by buying a bigger, better, but less risky car.

Typical cheap 'first cars' eg Corsa, Yaris etc now attract higher premiums than you might expect. The problem nowadays is theft of parts or of the whole car to order. The demand for eg front bumper assemblies for Corsas is insane. The reason? 1st cars, driven by generally inexperienced drivers are more likely to have small accidents. Much more likely.. What's the part most likely to be damaged? Yep, front bumpers. So these cars attract massive amounts of claims.

Plus, the market for these little shopping trolley cars is huge, so they have inflated purchase prices. To give an example, my daughter, in her 20s, has just purchased as her 1st ever car a top spec 2009 Volvo S40. Her insurance quotes were lower than for the usual 1st cars in worse condition eg Clio, Corsa, Fiesta, Ibiza etc. Worth a look!
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,844
Location
First Class
Be aware- established knowledge is that you need a small, inexpensive runabout type car to keep insurance costs low.
This is no longer the case.

You can save money on insurance by buying a bigger, better, but less risky car.

Typical cheap 'first cars' eg Corsa, Yaris etc now attract higher premiums than you might expect. The problem nowadays is theft of parts or of the whole car to order. The demand for eg front bumper assemblies for Corsas is insane. The reason? 1st cars, driven by generally inexperienced drivers are more likely to have small accidents. Much more likely.. What's the part most likely to be damaged? Yep, front bumpers. So these cars attract massive amounts of claims.

Plus, the market for these little shopping trolley cars is huge, so they have inflated purchase prices. To give an example, my daughter, in her 20s, has just purchased as her 1st ever car a top spec 2009 Volvo S40. Her insurance quotes were lower than for the usual 1st cars in worse condition eg Clio, Corsa, Fiesta, Ibiza etc. Worth a look!

There’s certainly some truth in this. Fiestas in particular can be pricey to insure as they tend to attract boy (and girl) racer types. They often start off in an EcoBoost and progress to an ST when they can afford it. A car weighing just over a ton and with 200hp was the stuff of dreams when I was in my early 20s, they simply didn’t exist (in affordable form anyway). They don’t know they’re born these young’uns! ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top