Corporate Idiocy
Comedian Al Murray recounts a run-in with industrial-scale stupidity: "Car insurance company rang, without having sent me a renewal letter, asking for money. Made them answer security questions." In the same vein, tell us your stories about pointless paperwork and corporate quarter-wits
( , Thu 23 Feb 2012, 12:13)
Comedian Al Murray recounts a run-in with industrial-scale stupidity: "Car insurance company rang, without having sent me a renewal letter, asking for money. Made them answer security questions." In the same vein, tell us your stories about pointless paperwork and corporate quarter-wits
( , Thu 23 Feb 2012, 12:13)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread
That's how it works.
we (the insurer) pay out for your claim, so you don't have to pay for the damage. Basic transfer of risk. You take the gamble that any increase in premium is going to be significantly less than any claim you or anyone else) make against your policy. You don't *have* to make the claim, you choose to do so. Yes, it's what you pay your premium for, but you don't have to buy fully comp cover, you could insure third party only for much less, and you would only get penalised if you have a make a claim for a fault accident.
When insurers pay out on a claim but don't get the money back from the responsible driver, then it is classed as a fault accident and you find that you lose your NCD and your premium goes up - and the increase in premium is determined by many factors, the cost of the claim being one of them. If they don't do this, then either EVERYONE'S premium shoots through the roof, or eventually the pot of money that is put aside to pay claims will run dry and then an insurer will cease trading, causing you a world of grief. The FSA have some very very strict rules for us believe it or not.
I'm continually amazed by how many people think they should be able to make a claim for thousands of pounds against a policy and NOT see their premium go up.
( , Wed 29 Feb 2012, 13:41, Reply)
we (the insurer) pay out for your claim, so you don't have to pay for the damage. Basic transfer of risk. You take the gamble that any increase in premium is going to be significantly less than any claim you or anyone else) make against your policy. You don't *have* to make the claim, you choose to do so. Yes, it's what you pay your premium for, but you don't have to buy fully comp cover, you could insure third party only for much less, and you would only get penalised if you have a make a claim for a fault accident.
When insurers pay out on a claim but don't get the money back from the responsible driver, then it is classed as a fault accident and you find that you lose your NCD and your premium goes up - and the increase in premium is determined by many factors, the cost of the claim being one of them. If they don't do this, then either EVERYONE'S premium shoots through the roof, or eventually the pot of money that is put aside to pay claims will run dry and then an insurer will cease trading, causing you a world of grief. The FSA have some very very strict rules for us believe it or not.
I'm continually amazed by how many people think they should be able to make a claim for thousands of pounds against a policy and NOT see their premium go up.
( , Wed 29 Feb 2012, 13:41, Reply)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread