Multiple cars = multiple policies?

[ChiefChavley]

I have a question that I can't get my head around. I must be missing something so thought I'd ask on here.

 

I have a 350z which is 280-odd bhp that I have insured. So I've got my policy that I've paid for which basically says that the insurance company is happy for me to drive a 280bhp motor up to 5,000 miles a year and hopefully not make any claims in that time. I understand that they have a database of numbers and algorithms to work out risk and then price that risk (with a premium on top for their profit) and I'm fine with that. I work with databases myself so I have a good grasp of how this part of it works.

 

But suppose I want to insure my MR2 Roadster now. I have the choice of taking out a new policy with no claims starting from zero (I currently have 6 years) or if they offer it, I can go for mirror policy so I get a separate policy which takes my existing no claims into account, but I need to pay pretty much the usual insurance price for this, as if i were taking it out as my only car.

 

My question is this: If my insurance company is happy enough for me to drive a 280bhp car, then why would I have to pay extra to cover my 140bhp MR2? If anything, my insurance policy should go down, because I'm now sharing my regular driving between two cars, sometimes driving the lesser powered one of them (rather than drive the 350z everywhere). Because you can only ever drive one car at one time, you can't drive both simultaneously.

 

Not a rant, just wanted some insight into what raises the risk profile of a person with two cars that warrants having to pay more for the second (lesser power) car.

 

Are there policies available that allow you to drive any car up to a certain insurance group?

[ddcboyle]

Seems a good point, the only way I think they could justify it is one car drives differently to another, so thats different braking, you might try overtale in mr2 when your used to 350 power.

 

Another point is their covering for fire and theft, so if someone drives their car straight into your garden, thats 2 cars written off.

 

You own both cars, so both keys would be in your house which would promote theft of 2 cars.

 

Just a guess though :/

 

Edit: im sure there is iinsurnce cover to drive a high amount of vehicles, but I think its for business use, I.e. garages. If not, id presume it to be quite expensive

Edited July 5, 2013 by ddcboyle

[Dayy]

It's just another way to screw the general public over no doubt.

[ilogikal1]

Another point is their covering for fire and theft, so if someone drives their car straight into your garden, thats 2 cars written off.

 

You own both cars, so both keys would be in your house which would promote theft of 2 cars.

 

That. Also, if you happen to write off one car, there's still as great a risk (or more according to insurance companies, because once you've claimed that's all you ever do for you the next 5 years... or something) of having to pay out for the other car.

 

Twice the assets, twice the risk of them having to pay out, twice the premium, simple.

[stuarty]

They would have to cover both cars for theft. Also the public would soon cotton on and everyone would insure 2 cars in there name, even though one would be a partners or parent etc!

[techinstaller]

As you suggest for cover for many vehicles and upto a limit insurance group type cover is really in the realms of motor trade policy ,we can then drive any vehicles owned by ourselves or under our care and custody ,premiums vary as with all insurance quotes and can depend on far more variables than a standard motor policy but also include our premises,public liability ,tools ,business interuption etc ,for me and other friends in trade 2K seems average.

These days the main insurers do seem to be quite definite on proving genuine traders rather than people trying to use trader policy for privet type use ,having premises and workshops etc but as i am motor trade does mean i can have a nice choice of toys which would not be possible otherwise

[ChiefChavley]

Insurance companies might have you believe that second car is another car that needs covering for theft etc. but in my case first car (350z) is worth 5500 and second car would only be valued at around 1k - total value would be 6.5k.

 

If i were to declare my Z as having 6.5k value then my insurance might go up another £50 perhaps (or maybe slightly more) so why should adding the mr2 cost another 400 or more?

 

Like techinstaller said above, there are trade policies that cover you to drive any car under your custody, there should be similar products available for the general folk.

[hensh65]

I have a question that I can't get my head around. I must be missing something so thought I'd ask on here.

 

I have a 350z which is 280-odd bhp that I have insured. So I've got my policy that I've paid for which basically says that the insurance company is happy for me to drive a 280bhp motor up to 5,000 miles a year and hopefully not make any claims in that time. I understand that they have a database of numbers and algorithms to work out risk and then price that risk (with a premium on top for their profit) and I'm fine with that. I work with databases myself so I have a good grasp of how this part of it works.

 

But suppose I want to insure my MR2 Roadster now. I have the choice of taking out a new policy with no claims starting from zero (I currently have 6 years) or if they offer it, I can go for mirror policy so I get a separate policy which takes my existing no claims into account, but I need to pay pretty much the usual insurance price for this, as if i were taking it out as my only car.

 

My question is this: If my insurance company is happy enough for me to drive a 280bhp car, then why would I have to pay extra to cover my 140bhp MR2? If anything, my insurance policy should go down, because I'm now sharing my regular driving between two cars, sometimes driving the lesser powered one of them (rather than drive the 350z everywhere). Because you can only ever drive one car at one time, you can't drive both simultaneously.

 

Not a rant, just wanted some insight into what raises the risk profile of a person with two cars that warrants having to pay more for the second (lesser power) car.

 

Are there policies available that allow you to drive any car up to a certain insurance group?

 

having worked in insurance in a past life, most insurers either start with a min policy price and add up the rating factors onto this price, or start at a max price and deduct rating factors. Take your 350z out the equation, the issue with your price is that you can't allocate your no claims bonus to the MR2.

Mirror policies only tend to be slightly discounted and will be nothing in comparison to your no claims.

Most insurers wont recognise anything to do with your other car other than a “2^nd car discountâ€

If you are sharing the miles between both cars did you reduce this on your original quote? ( bare in mind that miles per year is a rating factor, too little miles can put your price up as can a lot of miles )

I once done a quote where we spelt the customers name wrong just before we sold it, when we rectified this the price went up! Never ever seen that again but it happened!

[maxi-glasgow]

In my case I insured my 06 plate Saab 93 1.9TDI diesel for something like £340 for the year with roughly 10 years no claims and I am 44.

 

I bought the 350Z 05 plate Roadster and said I would only drive 5000 miles per year and they added it on a multicar policy with esure for roughly the same price of £340 a year.

 

I was actually surprised because when I had phoned previously when I was thinking about it I am sure they said my 350Z would cost over £500

 

And I have two driving convictions, one an SP30 and one an SP50 gained in the last 2 years.

Edited July 25, 2013 by maxi-glasgow

[rabbitstew]

They would have to cover both cars for theft. Also the public would soon cotton on and everyone would insure 2 cars in there name, even though one would be a partners or parent etc!

 

Not if you want third party only and for just you to drive only.

 

Ive had arguments with insurance companies over this before and they cant offer an explaination, only that its their policy.

 

In my case say ive got a 50grand lambo and paying £2k a year insurance on it. If im happy with third party only cover and only the car im driving at any one time to be covered whilst the others parked in my drive, Why should I pay more for driving a £200 Ford Fiesta in the week whilst keeping my Lambo for the weekend.

 

If you look at the risk to the insurance company, its a fraction of the risk for them when im driving my Fiesta in the week, compared to if i was driving the Lambo every day. With third party only insurance, regardless of what car your driving, the insurance only covers the car you run into. But, as far as they are concerned, insurance is on the car, not the driver and so they use any opportunity to charge you more. In my case, i can only use NCB on one car, so id have to insure the Fiesta as if I had no NCB at all, which means they would sting me even more to insure it.

 

Ive actually got 2 cars and 3 motorbikes. And if i want to drive all 5 items I have to have 5 seperate insurance policies. Sure, some companies offer "multi car" policies, but in every case ive looked its been more expensive than insuring them seperately. So, now ive got 2 motorbike policies, with various NCB on each, and 2 car policies with different NCB on them too. Right pain in the rear.

 

What makes it even more hilarious is that whilst third party only insurance means much lower payouts for the insurance company, statistically they have had more payouts. So, for me, FULLY COMP insurance is miles cheaper than Third Party Only! I was quoted £500 for TP Only for one of my cars and yet only £80 Fully Comp from the same company!!!

 

As you suggest for cover for many vehicles and upto a limit insurance group type cover is really in the realms of motor trade policy ,we can then drive any vehicles owned by ourselves or under our care and custody ,

 

I looked into this as this appeared to be the ideal solution in my situation. However, there were only a handful of insurance companies offering trade insurance. You had to prove you were a genuine trader, drive with trade plates and also take out public liability insurance before they would consider it. And even then the quote they gave me was mega high.

Edited July 25, 2013 by rabbitstew

[techinstaller]

The trade insurance was not really a suggestion as a solution to your problem as they are as you say quite rightly very strict on proving genuine motor trade use ,and these days are suspicious of buisness without commercial premises .Although you dont have to be nessacerely buying and selling vehicles but any motor trade occupation where we need to drive customer vehicles ,or vehicles left in our care and custody .We need the public liability cover in any case ,but i guess the bonus is we cover all the vehicles owned by us on the same policy meaning i can own as many cars as i wish and they are all covered.Trade plates btw are not compulsory for trade Insurance they are merly portable road tax ,i dont need them in our work as all vehicles we have in are definatley taxed

[rabbitstew]

Right, so following on with this co-incidentally I had another run in with my insurance company. I have several motorbikes, but only insure 1 atm. Its a Yamaha R1, worth about 3grand. 1000cc, 145bhp. Costs me £65 a year to insure 3rd party.

 

So, ive been offered a Ducati 996. Same year, same engine size, same value. But its a slower motorbike and its only 120bhp.

 

I want it 3rd party only again. So, the only time there is a risk for the insurance company is on the bike im out riding at the time. If its stolen, catches fire or if i crash, the insurance dont pay out. They only pay out for the vehicle I hit.

 

So call up my insurance company and they want nearly £200 extra to insure the Ducati on top of the R1. Where is the logic in that? Im surely less likely to crash a slower, lower powered bike. So if im out on the Ducati rather than the R1 they will be less likely to ever have a pay out.

 

So, I then ask, how about if i want to insure another identical R1, so id have 2 identical bikes, identical value, year, cover & risk. That came in at the same as if I insured the Ducati & R1. How an earth do they work these prices out?

[nowhereboy]

It's bussiness at the end of the day fella.

 

Why would companys allow you to pile loads of cars on to one policy allowing you to get the discount for the NCB on each car? The rule states one set of bonus per policy and that rule suits the companys nicely. They aint gonna argue with that.

 

(I'm an insurance broker by the way).