Yip......and why bother spending money developing 'logic'.........just use the statistics excuse that allows you to charge everyone more. I can't imaging there are too many people on the insurance companies directing board campaigning for lower premiums for their customers - lower premiums = lower profits.
Exactly, and they only ever concentrate on the statistics to increase premiums. They never look at those which can reduce it.
I remember when I tried to insure a Renault 5 GT Turbo years back. I had 2 immobilisers and an alarm on it, but because they were not "approved" they completely disregarded them. I also kept the car blocked in on the drive by 2 other cars... again, insurance company didnt even care about that, and it was also behind a locked gate with a f**k off nasty German Shepherd dog wandering about - once again insurance companies didnt care.
But I ask you, if you were a thief, would you go to all that hassle of breaking into 2 other cars, moving them, picking the lock on the iron gates, then breaking into the 5 turbo, spending ages trying to over ride the 2 immobilisers and alarm whist having a big nasty dog sitting there watching you? or would you just go up the road and nick another car?
As far as the insurance companies were concerned, they charged me exactly the same as one with no alarm, no dog and parked on the road in full view of everyone.
I remember getting one quote from a company who advertised on telly that they were the cheapest, and it came in at £2800, third party only. At the time i was 30 and had 11 years NCB.
Here we are, 10 years later and ive a quote for the same car, but this time with no NCB and insurance companies are quoting me £88 fully comp. Go figure?