Donate SIGN UP

No claims bonus

Avatar Image
Scylax | 16:57 Fri 02nd Sep 2005 | Motoring
6 Answers
It seems to me that paying extra to preserve one's NCB is dubious. Year by year premiums increase, and following an accident they increase greatly.  The NCB will not help if the increase is greater that the bonus.  Put simply, a 40% NCB is chickenfeed if the basic premium is �5000. Tell me I'm wrong.......
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 6 of 6rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Scylax. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
If your basic premium is �5000 then you are driving the wrong car or have too much money to waste.
Question Author
Yes, of course, Gef - �5000 is an exaggerated premium,merely to illustrate the point I am trying to make ie. that the NCB will have little effect in reducing the basic premium.  Insurers are not in the business of losing money if they can avoid it by manipulation.

Surely you would make a better argument if you did not use your exaggerated figures.

Using your figures, without the No Claims Discount of 40% your premium of �5000 would actually be �8333.33.

Best case scenario for most insurance policies is that after a non-protected claim your NCD would drop back to nil with no further "accident loading" to the premium, thus making your next premium (forgetting annual price rises which are independent of claims) �3333.33 more expensive, which would not be the case if you paid the �20 (or whatever) for the NCD Protection.

Any "accident loading" added to your premium would need to be greater than �3314 for your scenario to be true.

Question Author

Uh Uh.....I'm a bit sick of my own Q. already.  I reckoned that the basic premium was that charged before deductions for NCDs. etc.  Wrong again.

�5000 may seem beyond belief, by the way, but wait and see.  I distinctly remember thinking that if petrol ever became �1 per gallon nobody, but nobody, would drive again.  At �1 per litre we are still here. The only iniquity is that c.70% is tax for an impoverished Mr. Brown, poor soul. 

It's about 25 years since petrol hit �1 per gallon (which is equivalent to c.�3.70 today using RPI, or 80p per litre) so in real terms fuel is 25% more expensive than a quarter century ago. Six months ago the cost of petrol was 80p per litre, so it is only recent events which have caused any disparity.

I mention all of this because I see no correlation between fuel pricing and insurance premium increases. In the last 5 years all increases in my yearly premium has been more than offset by me moving to another, cheaper provider and so I cannot really envisage my current �220ish policy rocketing to �5000 in the forseeable future... unless there is something you know that you aren't telling the rest of us.

I agree with you about fuel duty and tax. Back in 1975 virtually all of this revenue was spent on roads & public transport. Currently only around a fifth is now used for transport related expenditure, enabling Mr Brown to fill the coffers with the extra �30 billion raised from fuel.

I dont bother with NCD protection. I change company every year on the Internet. When a renewal arrives its expensive. I drive an Audi A4 FSI and I just paid �204 fully comp. (Privilage Ins). Direct line just asked me to renew and it went up �70, This happens every year, so its cheaper to shop around every year. Maybe next year I will have MoreThan or someone else. Who knows?

1 to 6 of 6rss feed

Do you know the answer?

No claims bonus

Answer Question >>