new quote here

[andrey77]

£3038.32 for 1 year.    what's that?

My existing insurer sent me the letter that say they can not cover me next year.

[Linas.P]

Did you have any claim by any chance? 

Apart of that I just advise to run a comparison site and review some of your questions, some inconsequential answers can have huge impact on quote. For example in my case adding business miles reduce the quote by £300 (from £900 to 600). Is there anything wrong to say that I will do 2000 business miles and 4000 personal? No... no issue with that, there is no way for insurance to know what part was business and what was personal... and as far as I am concerned I more likely than not do exactly 0 business miles, but £300 saved.

Other question is your car stored in locked compound or locked garage or residential car park... well I can answer this question any way I like, because where my car is parked could be all 3 of those things... yet for some reason locked compound which comes under category other is £200 cheaper. As well check the date, the difference for me starting the insurance from next day vs. 10 days later was like 50%... so £1,200 vs. £600 by just moving the day a little bit. Go figure!

Although £3000 is not in itself unbelievable, when I was 19 my first quote was £36,000... and my first insurance on IS250 when I was 25 was £2,400 or maybe £2,600. UK Insurance is ridiculous and retarded so I would not be surprised if that is what they decided to charge you for some weird reason. 

[Littorio]

As Linas, plus your age can have an effect and the area, also all car insurance has over the last year gone up, mine went up £300 even with no change to my situation. The RC is seen as a performance car so some insurers will not insure, my old company would not insure me when I brought mine. The cars valve can have an effect on the premium and the insurer can check if the car has any accident history and what category that will also have an effect.

As an indicator, a work colleague in his early 20's brought an old Astra VXR and his insurance was £5000 on a car worth £3000! He recently brought a BMW 135 after only driving the Astra for a year and his insurance has gone down to £2500.  

[DavidCM]

Have you done or declared any modifications?That would affect the premium.

[Linas.P]

8 hours ago, Littorio said:

As Linas, plus your age can have an effect and the area, also all car insurance has over the last year gone up, mine went up £300 even with no change to my situation. The RC is seen as a performance car so some insurers will not insure, my old company would not insure me when I brought mine. The cars valve can have an effect on the premium and the insurer can check if the car has any accident history and what category that will also have an effect.

As an indicator, a work colleague in his early 20's brought an old Astra VXR and his insurance was £5000 on a car worth £3000! He recently brought a BMW 135 after only driving the Astra for a year and his insurance has gone down to £2500.  

Indeed when I got RC200t my existing insurance on IS250 declined to cover me, which is just most ridiculous thing ever... one insurance adviser even told me "you an young guy in powerful sports car what do you expect"... and I was like "are you out of your mind... what do you define as 'young' I am over 30 already... and what is powerful car? It is 2L engine in it, does 2 doors makes it sports car...", but it is what it is. Lexus insurance categories, especially RC are ridiculously high. I believe RC F-Sport is like 42 and base model Luxury is 38, compare that to BMW 420i and their insurance category is 26, what other cars have 42... things like Jaguar XKR (XKRS is 46), or Aston Martin Vantage V8... RC-F is 44 if I remember right... I mean again - insurance is retarded in UK. They put RC300h F-Sport 2 categories below as 5L V8 RC-F... how does that make sense?! Although to be fair many things goes into category of the car and perhaps it is not that much cheaper to to repair RC300h in their eyes than it is to repair RC-F.

Damage to the car (i.e. existing category) usually reduces the premium, because it has lower value. If you come to claim on salvage car then they will give you the valuation and will take 20% off for D/N or 40% of C/S usually. So that shouldn't affect it. 

As well I am working on presumption that Andrey previously had insurance and it wasn't £3000, so perhaps something has changed compared to last year?

[Jgtcracer]

19 hours ago, Littorio said:

As Linas, plus your age can have an effect and the area, also all car insurance has over the last year gone up, mine went up £300 even with no change to my situation. The RC is seen as a performance car so some insurers will not insure, my old company would not insure me when I brought mine. The cars valve can have an effect on the premium and the insurer can check if the car has any accident history and what category that will also have an effect.

As an indicator, a work colleague in his early 20's brought an old Astra VXR and his insurance was £5000 on a car worth £3000! He recently brought a BMW 135 after only driving the Astra for a year and his insurance has gone down to £2500.  

I find it mental that someone thinks the average person in their early 20s can afford to spend that much on insurance for a car!  If I was in the market for a £3k car I wouldnt be able to spend £5k insuring it!

I moan about my £400 premium this year!

[Jgtcracer]

10 hours ago, Linas.P said:

Indeed when I got RC200t my existing insurance on IS250 declined to cover me, which is just most ridiculous thing ever... one insurance adviser even told me "you an young guy in powerful sports car what do you expect"... and I was like "are you out of your mind... what do you define as 'young' I am over 30 already... and what is powerful car? It is 2L engine in it, does 2 doors makes it sports car...", but it is what it is. Lexus insurance categories, especially RC are ridiculously high. I believe RC F-Sport is like 42 and base model Luxury is 38, compare that to BMW 420i and their insurance category is 26, what other cars have 42... things like Jaguar XKR (XKRS is 46), or Aston Martin Vantage V8... RC-F is 44 if I remember right... I mean again - insurance is retarded in UK. They put RC300h F-Sport 2 categories below as 5L V8 RC-F... how does that make sense?! Although to be fair many things goes into category of the car and perhaps it is not that much cheaper to to repair RC300h in their eyes than it is to repair RC-F.

Damage to the car (i.e. existing category) usually reduces the premium, because it has lower value. If you come to claim on salvage car then they will give you the valuation and will take 20% off for D/N or 40% of C/S usually. So that shouldn't affect it. 

As well I am working on presumption that Andrey previously had insurance and it wasn't £3000, so perhaps something has changed compared to last year?

Other things to consider are stuff like model history and number of incidents.  I can’t imagine there have been loads of insurance claims on RCF cars so they may actually be perceived as low risk!  I can certainly imagine that the equivalent Audi/BMW will be dearer!

[Linas.P]

2 hours ago, Jgtcracer said:

Other things to consider are stuff like model history and number of incidents.  I can’t imagine there have been loads of insurance claims on RCF cars so they may actually be perceived as low risk!  I can certainly imagine that the equivalent Audi/BMW will be dearer!

Not sure about RC-F but certainly not the case for RC200t/300h, they cost much more to insurance than equivalent German car. Rarity is double edged sword... on one hand less likely to have "bad history" (I still can't believe how stupid is that - other people crashed car similar to yours, so you will pay more to insure it...), but they will cost more to insure because by being rare they are harder and more expensive to replace.

[Littorio]

Oh one odd one, have your windows tinted staying within legal tint limits and declare it, that lowers your premium by around £100

However have PPF (Paint Protection Film) fitted and your premium goes up! Go figure.

[RONNIE W HODGEKINSON]

On 9/16/2023 at 8:16 PM, andrey77 said:

£3038.32 for 1 year.    what's that?

My existing insurer sent me the letter that say they can not cover me next year.

Hundreds of car insurers out there ...With A Myriad of prices.... Just find the best one for you.. Being loyal Nowadays to one insurer Seems to send a message that your an easy Target.... Hope that helps..!!

[Brian R]

52 minutes ago, RONNIE W HODGEKINSON said:

Hundreds of car insurers out there ...With A Myriad of prices.... Just find the best one for you.. Being loyal Nowadays to one insurer Seems to send a message that your an easy Target.... Hope that helps..!!

Exactly my take on matters but having said that I am into my third year with Darwin given they have come up trumps every time. My past insurers look like a whose who roll call!

[andrey77]

yes guys I know how it all works.  I had premium £85 per month which  refused on renewal , new cheapest quote I found last night on Gocompare is £111 but with a bit of lie about my driving licence, I had speeding points 3 years back.    I always lie them a bit to get cheaper and never been checked for the last 20 years. any singe claim I made during this long period was not refused. This is not advise!

Adrian flux on this forum must be more flex for us but no, they give their "best"

 

[RONNIE W HODGEKINSON]

1 hour ago, andrey77 said:

yes guys I know how it all works.  I had premium £85 per month which  refused on renewal , new cheapest quote I found last night on Gocompare is £111 but with a bit of lie about my driving licence, I had speeding points 3 years back.    I always lie them a bit to get cheaper and never been checked for the last 20 years. any singe claim I made during this long period was not refused. This is not advise!

Adrian flux on this forum must be more flex for us but no, they give their "best"

 

Only Problem Here is if you ever have an Accident or Incident involving another vehicle Your Insurance company check to see if there is any missing or incomplete information IE Your penalty points and that could impact your insurance claim in a big way Best to tell them to keep yourself right and avoid any hassle should anything unto ward happen..Andrey its good advice..!!!

[Linas.P]

1 hour ago, andrey77 said:

yes guys I know how it all works.  I had premium £85 per month which  refused on renewal , new cheapest quote I found last night on Gocompare is £111 but with a bit of lie about my driving licence, I had speeding points 3 years back.    I always lie them a bit to get cheaper and never been checked for the last 20 years. any singe claim I made during this long period was not refused. This is not advise!

Adrian flux on this forum must be more flex for us but no, they give their "best"

Adrian flux are a bit of joke, to be fair to them they expected particular clientele here (that associated with Lexus ownership) and they serve them well, but when I had issues insuring my RC they got something like £5000-6000 as well from them.

Insurance companies almost never check anything until there is serious accident. Bending the truth slightly on things that can't be checked or could be interpreted is fine, for example I had speed awareness course once and I know they can't check it... but points on license is big risk, they can be checked and are checked occasionally. And once that happens they cancel your cover and you will never get another one again (I guess for maybe 5 years). 

P.S. I find it unfair that insurance companies are even allowed to ask this. We in "democratic" society agreed that speeding drivers will get 3 points +£100, they got their points, they paid their fine, the punishment is served. Now stupid insurance companies rolls along and wants to make money from this. No sorry - the punishment was already served, who are you police, government, why you have a right to alter and obviously always increase the punishment, so I think it is fundamentally unfair for them to be able to access such information. Point should only for the goverment to know and should only be used for intended purpose i.e. when 12 are collected take the license away. That is the sole purpose and should not be used for private companies to profiteer... So I don't blame you, but as it is today that is still big risk not declaring it. 

[Boomer54]

7 hours ago, Littorio said:

Oh one odd one, have your windows tinted staying within legal tint limits and declare it, that lowers your premium by around £100

However have PPF (Paint Protection Film) fitted and your premium goes up! Go figure.

I think there may be more logic there than appears at first blush. For example, perhaps a glass tint is seen to reduce the probability ,hence cost, associated with theft from cars.

A PPF though one imagines raises the potential cost of a car repair following any damage to the bodywork.

I really do not know if the above holds true. Just me musing on it.

[Linas.P]

25 minutes ago, Boomer54 said:

I think there may be more logic there than appears at first blush. For example, perhaps a glass tint is seen to reduce the probability ,hence cost, associated with theft from cars.

A PPF though one imagines raises the potential cost of a car repair following any damage to the bodywork.

I really do not know if the above holds true. Just me musing on it.

No logic holds true with UK insurers. Most random thing increase and reduce premium, it is mess. 

[Boomer54]

20 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

No logic holds true with UK insurers. Most random thing increase and reduce premium, it is mess. 

Confucius say 'he who see no logic may need go to Specsavers'

[Linas.P]

20 minutes ago, Boomer54 said:

Confucius say 'he who see no logic may need go to Specsavers'

It is not that I don't see it, there isn't any.

Why adding business miles would make my insurance cheaper? why fully-comprehensive is cheaper than third party only? Why being married or having kids would make your insurance cheaper? why particular occupation makes insurance much more expensive/cheaper? Why having upgraded brakes that helps your car to stop better make your insurance more expensive? Why insurance companies do not check tyres despite tyres being pretty much most consequential thing to safety? Why insurance companies punishes the person who is not at fault, when somebody crashes into them? 

And to be honest... there is LOGIC... that logic is - their algorithm exist to extract as much money as possible, so whereas we looking at it from rational perspective of what makes us "safer" drivers, what makes our car "safer" to drive, because that seems to be important for reasonable person... insurers don't look into it this way, they look into it from the perspective "how to make insurance more expensive without looking like we discriminate people". Let's add opaque algorithm so that nobody know how the highest possible price was generated.

Personal example of literally last week... I paid something like £580 for insurance on GS300, but that is European Road Side Assistance which is like £99 on it's own. My girlfriend was learning to drive and wanted to use the car to practice and maybe as well for exam, she could not do it because no insurance would provide learner insurance for her on such car (they happily did on RC200t and IS250, but not GS300). Now sounds kind of fair enough - GS is large car, not most suitable for learner. Anyhow... she passed her test and I wanted to add her to my insurance... could you guess how much it costed to put her on as second driver? 

[Boomer54]

49 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

It is not that I don't see it, there isn't any.

Why adding business miles would make my insurance cheaper? why fully-comprehensive is cheaper than third party only? Why being married or having kids would make your insurance cheaper? why particular occupation makes insurance much more expensive/cheaper? Why having upgraded brakes that helps your car to stop better make your insurance more expensive? Why insurance companies do not check tyres despite tyres being pretty much most consequential thing to safety? Why insurance companies punishes the person who is not at fault, when somebody crashes into them? 

And to be honest... there is LOGIC... that logic is - their algorithm exist to extract as much money as possible, so whereas we looking at it from rational perspective of what makes us "safer" drivers, what makes our car "safer" to drive, because that seems to be important for reasonable person... insurers don't look into it this way, they look into it from the perspective "how to make insurance more expensive without looking like we discriminate people". Let's add opaque algorithm so that nobody know how the highest possible price was generated.

Personal example of literally last week... I paid something like £580 for insurance on GS300, but that is European Road Side Assistance which is like £99 on it's own. My girlfriend was learning to drive and wanted to use the car to practice and maybe as well for exam, she could not do it because no insurance would provide learner insurance for her on such car (they happily did on RC200t and IS250, but not GS300). Now sounds kind of fair enough - GS is large car, not most suitable for learner. Anyhow... she passed her test and I wanted to add her to my insurance... could you guess how much it costed to put her on as second driver? 

ok, then on more a more serious note perhaps you do not see it because you are not, I assume, an Actuary ?

[RONNIE W HODGEKINSON]

56 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

It is not that I don't see it, there isn't any.

Why adding business miles would make my insurance cheaper? why fully-comprehensive is cheaper than third party only? Why being married or having kids would make your insurance cheaper? why particular occupation makes insurance much more expensive/cheaper? Why having upgraded brakes that helps your car to stop better make your insurance more expensive? Why insurance companies do not check tyres despite tyres being pretty much most consequential thing to safety? Why insurance companies punishes the person who is not at fault, when somebody crashes into them? 

And to be honest... there is LOGIC... that logic is - their algorithm exist to extract as much money as possible, so whereas we looking at it from rational perspective of what makes us "safer" drivers, what makes our car "safer" to drive, because that seems to be important for reasonable person... insurers don't look into it this way, they look into it from the perspective "how to make insurance more expensive without looking like we discriminate people". Let's add opaque algorithm so that nobody know how the highest possible price was generated.

Personal example of literally last week... I paid something like £580 for insurance on GS300, but that is European Road Side Assistance which is like £99 on it's own. My girlfriend was learning to drive and wanted to use the car to practice and maybe as well for exam, she could not do it because no insurance would provide learner insurance for her on such car (they happily did on RC200t and IS250, but not GS300). Now sounds kind of fair enough - GS is large car, not most suitable for learner. Anyhow... she passed her test and I wanted to add her to my insurance... could you guess how much it costed to put her on as second driver? 

2 GRAND  ????????

 

[Linas.P]

17 minutes ago, Boomer54 said:

ok, then on more a more serious note perhaps you do not see it because you are not, I assume, an Actuary ?

No, it is more of the question what problem we are trying to solve? If the problem we are solving is to defraud consumers and extract maximum profit then I am sure it works very well... perfectly logical!  

11 minutes ago, RONNIE W HODGEKINSON said:

2 GRAND  ????????

You would think so - right?!

Little bit pre-amble. I already knew that her insurance will be cheaper because insurance IS cheaper for women, despite insurers saying it isn't... it is just fact. I can actually prove it. But when I was getting my insurance I ran quotes with and without her and as well for her alone. With her my insurance would have been ~£900, for her alone £700 (bear in mind when I was her age AND I already had 12 years of of driving experience my insurance was like £1600 AND on smaller and cheaper car).

It costed me 19 BRITISH ROYAL POUNDS to add her to the policy for remaining 10 months. £11 was admin fee and £8 was the actual premium, and I even included no claims protection! Go figure! She literally had driving license for 15 minutes! It would have been £18 to do it next day, but I paid extra £1 to do it same day because I wanted her to drive herself home as surprise!

Sure, that is all to do with the "safe driver I am" and her being second driver, but HOW does that make sense? No insurance whatsoever on that car if I am sitting on the side, but £8 for her to drive it alone with 15 minutes of driving history?!

[HPS13]

2 hours ago, Linas.P said:

P.S. I find it unfair that insurance companies are even allowed to ask this.

Personally I am glad that they do ask this. Someone who has acquired points on their licence for speeding has been deemed to have been driving in an unsafe manner. 

If you aren't prepared to drive within the allocated speed limits then you are a potential danger to other road users and hence you should experience an increase in your insurance premium. The higher the risk of the driver = higher insurance premium. 

Or if you look at it from another perspective, why should someone without points on their licence pay the same price as someone with 3+ penalty points? 

[Linas.P]

16 minutes ago, HPS13 said:

Personally I am glad that they do ask this. Someone who has acquired points on their licence for speeding has been deemed to have been driving in an unsafe manner. 

If you aren't prepared to drive within the allocated speed limits then you are a potential danger to other road users and hence you should experience an increase in your insurance premium. The higher the risk of the driver = higher insurance premium. 

Or if you look at it from another perspective, why should someone without points on their licence pay the same price as someone with 3+ penalty points? 

No - you been found guilty and punished already. This is the basis of FAIR punishment. It is actually against human rights to be punished twice for same crime.

If we say the fine should be £2000 and that is what we agree as society, then it's fine (like Switzerland or Finland has fines based on income), if we agree that fine should be £20, that is fine as well, I got 6 Euro as speeding fine for 11km/h over from Lithuania, similar from Germany I think it was 20 Euro for 8km/h over (although they now increased the fines). In the end of the day - our laws, police and government has to decide what fair punishment is, not some stupid privately owned company. And the punishment money should go back to victims or the society, not the shareholders of privately owned business. 

So on one hand I get what you are saying and agree - one has to be punished for breaking the rules, but on other hand I disagree - it is not privately owned insurance company who should be carrying it out.

Same story with young drivers and old drivers now. In principle it is no longer your driving license that allows you or disallows you to drive, in this country now insurance companies that decides who can and who can't drive. Logic would be that if you passed your driving exam then you should be able to drive, as well if you over 80 and you passed your medical check-up or whatever and deemed fit to continue driving you should be allowed to drive. But insurance companies says NO. In theory you can drive, but in practice you will have to pay £8000 for insurance and nobody can pay it, well maybe some people can, but it is pretty much makes driving no longer viable.

In summary I am just saying  - insurance companies should not be the ones carrying out punishment, we have public institutions for that. 

[ColinBarber]

18 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

No - you been found guilty and punished already. This is the basis of FAIR punishment. It is actually against human rights to be punished twice for same crime.

Two different things. Insurance companies price policies based on risk, and that risk is determined by multiple factors including age, experience, being involved in accidents or breaking driving laws etc.

The alternative is everyone pays the same, at which point people with clean driving records would be upset that they are subsidising others.

[Bezzer]

41 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

No - you been found guilty and punished already. This is the basis of FAIR punishment. It is actually against human rights to be punished twice for same crime. should not be the ones carrying out punishment, we have public institutions for that. 

What a flawed opinion, you are way off. You are not being punished twice, you have committed a traffic offence so arguably have a greater risk of doing it again, it rightly costs to cover those risks, you either pay it or you don’t. There is a spent conviction time limit so your speeding and other minor stuff don’t have to be declared to almost anyone after 5 years, which shows if you have learnt your lesson….or not as the case may be. Nothing at all to do with human rights you are not being punished, you put yourself in that position, yes Insurance Companies are a rip off but you gave them more ammunition.