ADUK Archive

What the hell message does this say
http://www.adrianflux.co.uk/driverguard/
Adrianflux should be ashamed

For right or wrong, this sort of insurance has been available for a few years now.

Adrian Flux are only the brokers and presumably providing a service that has been asked for or they think they can sell. The insurers obviously don't expect to pay out often given the premium vs cover (assume 50% of premium for expenses/profit suggests they expect less than 1 in 320 to claim). I think I heard that the norm for claiming on car insurance is something like 5% of policies sold

That does seem a little wrong, but then so are speed cameras that result in you receiving points on your license for several years as a result of briefly exceeding a speed limit.

If we had a fairer system (average speed cameras that penalise those who ignore a speed limit for a prolonged period) people may be less inclined to take out this type of insurance.

What's the difference between insuring against losses incurred from disqualification and losses incurred from crashing your car? Surely both send out the same message?

MGF wrote:What's the difference between insuring against losses incurred from disqualification and losses incurred from crashing your car? Surely both send out the same message?

For one thing, normal car insurance is compulsory with a small add on if you want to insure for your own loss and, secondly, it's far easier to guarantee you won't get any points and/or lose your licence.

Comprehensive insurance isn't compulsory and if you are careful you should be able to avoid claiming on it. Accidents tend to happen because of drivers not paying attention.The same failing can lead to losing your licence.
Knowing your insurance will pay if you do make a mistake doesn't doesn't encourage you to avoid accidents.

MGF wrote:Knowing your insurance will pay if you do make a mistake doesn't doesn't encourage you to avoid accidents.

The knowledge that claims will significantly increase premiums does though....

In that case it'a a good job we don't have no claims protection. Why would anyone pay for that?

MGF wrote:Comprehensive insurance isn't compulsory and if you are careful you should be able to avoid claiming on it. Accidents tend to happen because of drivers not paying attention.The same failing can lead to losing your licence.
Knowing your insurance will pay if you do make a mistake doesn't doesn't encourage you to avoid accidents.

Are you on medication? If so, check the label.

What if, for example, someone damages your car when you're parked or otherwise stationary?

You know as well as everyone else that insuring yourself against breaking the law is completely different to insuring yourself against something you may have no control over.

Now stop trying to wind everyone up. That's my job.

Silk wrote:

MGF wrote:Comprehensive insurance isn't compulsory and if you are careful you should be able to avoid claiming on it. Accidents tend to happen because of drivers not paying attention.The same failing can lead to losing your licence.
Knowing your insurance will pay if you do make a mistake doesn't doesn't encourage you to avoid accidents.

Are you on medication? If so, check the label.

Same to you!

Silk wrote:What if, for example, someone damages your car when you're parked or otherwise stationary?

That's the primary reason you buy comprehensive insurance???!!!

Silk wrote:You know as well as everyone else that insuring yourself against breaking the law is completely different to insuring yourself against something you may have no control over.

Insuring yourself against breaking the law? What a bizarre way to describe it. The punishment for a speeding offence is a fine and some points. Where does it say the insurance company is offering to pay your fine or take your points?

The heading is misleading as the insurance cannot protect you from losing your licence or reduce the chances of doing so. It simply provides compensation for consequential financial loss. This loss is and the capacity to pay for it varies between different people. If financial loss is meant to be a deterrent then only those who cannot afford to lose their licence should be granted one.

GJD wrote:

Silk wrote:

MGF wrote:Comprehensive insurance isn't compulsory and if you are careful you should be able to avoid claiming on it. Accidents tend to happen because of drivers not paying attention.The same failing can lead to losing your licence.
Knowing your insurance will pay if you do make a mistake doesn't doesn't encourage you to avoid accidents.

Are you on medication? If so, check the label.

Same to you!?

I always do, but thanks for your concern. I just wish people would extend the same courtesy to my posts and actually read what I've written before trying to score points.

GJD wrote:

Silk wrote:What if, for example, someone damages your car when you're parked or otherwise stationary?

That's the primary reason you buy comprehensive insurance???!!!?

It's one of the reasons. Again, if you'd taken the trouble to read the thread before jumping in, you'd realise I made the point in reply to MGF, who appears to believe that all claims requiring comprehensive insurance are avoidable.

GJD wrote:

Silk wrote:You know as well as everyone else that insuring yourself against breaking the law is completely different to insuring yourself against something you may have no control over.

Insuring yourself against breaking the law? What a bizarre way to describe it. The punishment for a speeding offence is a fine and some points. Where does it say the insurance company is offering to pay your fine or take your points?

Talk about stating the obvious. Of course, the insurance can't magically return your licence. All it does is to compensate for monetary loss as a consequence of losing your licence. So, yes, it does insure you against breaking the law - an activity that's entirely avoidable for all but the terminally unobservant.

Silk wrote: ...blah...

Untwist your knickers dear. I did read the whole thread before jumping in. I chose to respond to you because you were spouting more obvious claptrap and I didn't have a barrel of fish handy to shoot into. Insure against breaking the law indeed! Perhaps a little reading on your part wouldn't go amiss - read MGF's last post before yours. And when you've understood it, wind your bloody neck in .

Where's a moderator when you need one? This forum is going to hell in a handbasket with the morons they let in these days.

GJD wrote:

Silk wrote: ...blah...

Untwist your knickers dear. I did read the whole thread before jumping in. I chose to respond to you because you were spouting more obvious claptrap and I didn't have a barrel of fish handy to shoot into. Insure against breaking the law indeed! Perhaps a little reading on your part wouldn't go amiss - read MGF's last post before yours. And when you've understood it, wind your bloody neck in .

You really do need to calm down, it's not doing your blood pressure any good. If you're insuring against the consequences of braking the law, even if it's only part of the financial loss, then you are insuring against breaking the law. If you don't intend on breaking the law, then you're not going to need it and you can save yourself the money. There is no incentive to break the law if you have this insurance in place as it only provides limited compensation. It won't restore your licence and/or remove your points, so you're still better off not breaking the law even if you have this insurance. The only people who are likely to take out such a policy are those who believe they are incapable of avoiding prosecution. They would be incapable in any event, so the argument that such a policy encourages bad behaviour is false. They would still have no licence. The only difference is, they would have a bit more money in the bank whilst they wait to get it back.

GJD wrote:Where's a moderator when you need one? This forum is going to hell in a handbasket with the morons they let in these days.

If you time it right, you can get the last word in before the thread gets locked.

Grow up you two. :p

Dom