keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 4,581
Likes: 2,615
|
Post by keitha on Nov 4, 2024 14:08:43 GMT
Last year car insurance went up 75% for no good reason, this year house insurance 80% ( and no-one will beat it )
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,978 
Likes: 5,131
|
Post by adrianc on Nov 4, 2024 15:22:38 GMT
Last year - my car insurance was £400. This year, £350. My mother's was £900, this year £600.
The plural of anecdote is rarely data.
|
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 4,581
Likes: 2,615
|
Post by keitha on Nov 4, 2024 18:08:16 GMT
I could do with the car dropping
just looked online and nearly £200 lower this year
|
|
mogish
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,105
Likes: 527
|
Insurance
Nov 4, 2024 21:00:44 GMT
via mobile
Post by mogish on Nov 4, 2024 21:00:44 GMT
.y house insurance nearly doubled. 350 to 590. No claims, no accident cover, apparently it's down to environmental reasons and potential flood zone. News to me.
Shopped around and other quotes were over a grand.
Car insurance seems to have stabilised
Soon find out next month when car cover is due.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,677
Likes: 2,974
|
Post by michaelc on Nov 4, 2024 22:59:48 GMT
Last year car insurance went up 75% for no good reason, this year house insurance 80% ( and no-one will beat it ) Same here and for the first time in maybe 30 years decided not to insure (!) I wish there existed cover that would only pay out for absolutely catastrophic events such as death or explosion/fire rendering property needed to be demolished and rebuilt. I have no desire to insure anything I can easily replace myself.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,978
Likes: 5,131
|
Post by adrianc on Nov 5, 2024 7:26:02 GMT
Last year car insurance went up 75% for no good reason, this year house insurance 80% ( and no-one will beat it ) Same here and for the first time in maybe 30 years decided not to insure (!) I wish there existed cover that would only pay out for absolutely catastrophic events such as death or explosion/fire rendering property needed to be demolished and rebuilt. I have no desire to insure anything I can easily replace myself. Any bets the increase is due to claims for flood and storm damage, and similar climate-change-related risks? We've been here 12 years. The immediate area's had two flooding incidents this year which have surpassed anything in that time - and, talking to those who've been here a lot longer, anything they remember. One of them was last month, and there's the rest of winter to go. It doesn't take much of a claim on house insurance to outstrip a decade or three's premiums.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Nov 5, 2024 8:29:36 GMT
Last year car insurance went up 75% for no good reason, this year house insurance 80% ( and no-one will beat it ) Same here and for the first time in maybe 30 years decided not to insure (!) I wish there existed cover that would only pay out for absolutely catastrophic events such as death or explosion/fire rendering property needed to be demolished and rebuilt. I have no desire to insure anything I can easily replace myself. you don't have to pay out for contents insurance if you don't want to. Probably the most expensive "contents" in our house would be our cycles. And no I'm not kidding. But not taking out building insurance? Is that really wise? And you could still have massive damage done to the property with no need for it to be demolished. A fire could destroy the roof and the resulting water damage destroy everything inside leaving a near shell. No demolition involved, but the rebuild costs would be very significant. Unless you have taken it out separately, you also do not have the public liability insurance that normally comes along with it. And what if your next door neighbour has a gas explosion? Leaving aside that ultimately you should be able to claim from them, who is going to handle your side for you? And what if they aren't properly covered? Or you have one while you aren't covered? Not having house insurance cover would worry me. A lot.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,978
Likes: 5,131
|
Post by adrianc on Nov 5, 2024 8:57:57 GMT
Same here and for the first time in maybe 30 years decided not to insure (!) I wish there existed cover that would only pay out for absolutely catastrophic events such as death or explosion/fire rendering property needed to be demolished and rebuilt. I have no desire to insure anything I can easily replace myself. you don't have to pay out for contents insurance if you don't want to. Probably the most expensive "contents" in our house would be our cycles. And no I'm not kidding. A lot of little replacement bills add up very, VERY quickly, though. Plus, of course, it's a condition of mortgage lenders. For obvious reasons.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,677
Likes: 2,974
|
Post by michaelc on Nov 5, 2024 13:35:59 GMT
Same here and for the first time in maybe 30 years decided not to insure (!) I wish there existed cover that would only pay out for absolutely catastrophic events such as death or explosion/fire rendering property needed to be demolished and rebuilt. I have no desire to insure anything I can easily replace myself. you don't have to pay out for contents insurance if you don't want to. Probably the most expensive "contents" in our house would be our cycles. And no I'm not kidding. But not taking out building insurance? Is that really wise? And you could still have massive damage done to the property with no need for it to be demolished. A fire could destroy the roof and the resulting water damage destroy everything inside leaving a near shell. No demolition involved, but the rebuild costs would be very significant. Unless you have taken it out separately, you also do not have the public liability insurance that normally comes along with it. And what if your next door neighbour has a gas explosion? Leaving aside that ultimately you should be able to claim from them, who is going to handle your side for you? And what if they aren't properly covered? Or you have one while you aren't covered? Not having house insurance cover would worry me. A lot. Obviously I don't bother with contents. I can't prove it obviously but I suspect its all the frills in _buildings_ insurance that bumps up the price. I don't include my neighbour having a gas explosion (although he is about 70M away so it would need to be some explosion). So I'd like to insure against catastrophic fire (ok including taking the roof off unless its spring time) and 3rd party claims such as a falling tree I get blamed for. All the things I really can't pay for if they happened - isn't that what insurance is for ? Or is it to make a claim on a £100 Halfords bike because I spent £29 extra on the "bikes package"? Oh that's contents - ok how about a window lock not closing properly anymore? Or the classic for the DIY bolt-on "a burst pipe".
|
|
eeyore
Member of DD Central
Posts: 796
Likes: 804
|
Post by eeyore on Nov 5, 2024 13:49:24 GMT
............ I wish there existed cover that would only pay out for absolutely catastrophic events such as death or explosion/fire rendering property needed to be demolished and rebuilt. I have no desire to insure anything I can easily replace myself. Is what you're looking for just simply a sizable excess on any claim - say £10k, rather than the standard £250-£1k, with a substantial reduction in the premium? Unfortunately, it seems insurance companies don't seem to offer it, or at least the highest I can find has an excess of £1k. Maybe an insurance broker could find something?
|
|
|
|
Post by Penny Pincher on Nov 5, 2024 13:57:14 GMT
I wish there existed cover that would only pay out for absolutely catastrophic events such as death or explosion/fire rendering property needed to be demolished and rebuilt. I have no desire to insure anything I can easily replace myself. I'm with you on this one Michael. I've always felt that the insurance industry is rigged against me in this respect. I estimate that I would not miss approximately 80% of my belongings if they were stolen and would happily fund the replacement of any that I do miss, myself. Why am I forced to insure everything! Likewise for the building, if you're in a position to fund a replacement home from savings and investments, should the need arise, then it's not crazy to forego insurance.
The insurance industry profits by collecting more in premiums than it pays out in claims. Therefore collectively, we the consumer, pay more in premiums than we make claims. Over a lifetime, a minority of unlucky (and even fewer unscrupulous) individuals make claims that are far in excess of their premiums. This distorts the individual consumer's lifetime premium-to-claim ratio even further. I've no idea what this ratio is for the average consumer, or if it's even possible to calculate it but I suspect that for some individuals it's rational, over a lifetime, to be their own insurer.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Nov 5, 2024 14:15:10 GMT
you don't have to pay out for contents insurance if you don't want to. Probably the most expensive "contents" in our house would be our cycles. And no I'm not kidding. But not taking out building insurance? Is that really wise? And you could still have massive damage done to the property with no need for it to be demolished. A fire could destroy the roof and the resulting water damage destroy everything inside leaving a near shell. No demolition involved, but the rebuild costs would be very significant. Unless you have taken it out separately, you also do not have the public liability insurance that normally comes along with it. And what if your next door neighbour has a gas explosion? Leaving aside that ultimately you should be able to claim from them, who is going to handle your side for you? And what if they aren't properly covered? Or you have one while you aren't covered? Not having house insurance cover would worry me. A lot. Obviously I don't bother with contents. I can't prove it obviously but I suspect its all the frills in _buildings_ insurance that bumps up the price. I don't include my neighbour having a gas explosion (although he is about 70M away so it would need to be some explosion). So I'd like to insure against catastrophic fire (ok including taking the roof off unless its spring time) and 3rd party claims such as a falling tree I get blamed for. All the things I really can't pay for if they happened - isn't that what insurance is for ? Or is it to make a claim on a £100 Halfords bike because I spent £29 extra on the "bikes package"? Oh that's contents - ok how about a window lock not closing properly anymore? Or the classic for the DIY bolt-on "a burst pipe". Agree with the bolded. Bikes: you need to have a zero on that value to even consider it worthwhile IMHO, so don't add on the bikes package. It's always an extra so why add it if you don't want it? Your last item comes under "accidental damage", and in every instance of insurance I've seen, that is also an optional extra, so don't add it on. As for the window lock, I've no idea how that would even be covered under any policy: sounds to me like wear and tear. Policies minus the bits you've described are normal base house insurance aren't they? Sure, they may include other things that you don't want as well.
|
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 4,581
Likes: 2,615
|
Post by keitha on Nov 5, 2024 14:40:38 GMT
I always go house and contents
Some years ago I dropped my digital SLR camera and destroyed the lens ( it was in 2 pieces and glass shattered ) and the impact dislodged the mirror in the camera body.
I put in a claim and was asked to send in the camera plus the lens, I also included as requested the original invoice for the camera, a week later a parcel arrived containing the camera and a request to ring the claims department.
I rang them and after passing security was told that "yes the camera and lens are damaged BER" so I asked what BER was and was told beyond economical repair. They asked did I want the assessed value of the items or replacements.
I asked for replacements, and they asked where I wanted it delivered home or work, so I asked for it to be sent to work
2 days later I get a call from reception a parcel has arrived.
they sent me a replacement ( seriously upgraded ) camera Kit including the standard lens and an every ready case, Also in the box was a brand new top of the range lens of a higher spec and longer range than the damaged one.
I felt quite bad for a few minutes because the old camera and lens had cost me < £300, the camera they sent was on offer at the time at £450 and the super lens was over £1,100.
But after a bit I thought what they've given me is 7 years premiums and I haven't claimed for over 10 so they are still winning
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,677
Likes: 2,974
|
Post by michaelc on Nov 5, 2024 16:01:38 GMT
I always go house and contents Some years ago I dropped my digital SLR camera and destroyed the lens ( it was in 2 pieces and glass shattered ) and the impact dislodged the mirror in the camera body. I put in a claim and was asked to send in the camera plus the lens, I also included as requested the original invoice for the camera, a week later a parcel arrived containing the camera and a request to ring the claims department. I rang them and after passing security was told that "yes the camera and lens are damaged BER" so I asked what BER was and was told beyond economical repair. They asked did I want the assessed value of the items or replacements. I asked for replacements, and they asked where I wanted it delivered home or work, so I asked for it to be sent to work 2 days later I get a call from reception a parcel has arrived. they sent me a replacement ( seriously upgraded ) camera Kit including the standard lens and an every ready case, Also in the box was a brand new top of the range lens of a higher spec and longer range than the damaged one. I felt quite bad for a few minutes because the old camera and lens had cost me < £300, the camera they sent was on offer at the time at £450 and the super lens was over £1,100. But after a bit I thought what they've given me is 7 years premiums and I haven't claimed for over 10 so they are still winning I figured you were a house and contents guy.  No disrespect intended - just we all have different characters and attitudes to risk. Last thing I wanna do is pay for someone's camera lens or all the processes, procedures and people behind it all.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,978
Likes: 5,131
|
Post by adrianc on Nov 5, 2024 16:10:25 GMT
The insurance industry profits by collecting more in premiums than it pays out in claims. Therefore collectively, we the consumer, pay more in premiums than we make claims. Indeed. And that's why self-insurance for affordable-claim scenarios makes sense. But we're talking about house insurance... You have a burst pipe, or a fire, or a branch through the roof, or <insert long list of eminently feasible things>, then one claim is going to put you firmly into this box :- ...and when you're in that box, you are going to be INCREDIBLY grateful you had it, because the vast majority of people simply aren't going to be able to afford tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of pounds of remedial work, plus interim accommodation. When I was a kid, our neighbour's kid got home from school, opened the kitchen door, and was greeted with an exploding fireball. A tea towel had slipped unnoticed down the back of the boiler that morning, smouldered all day and used up sufficient oxygen in the room to not do anything more - then, when the door was opened, it got sufficient fresh air to get exciting quickly. Two thirds of the house was gutted, and the family of four had to live elsewhere for about a year and a half. As for contents... Just look around your living room (electronics, furniture, furnishings) or bedroom (furniture, valuables, jewellery, clothing) - and think about how much the credit card would be hit for if you had to buy replacements for everything in the next week. Even before any damage to the property itself.
|
|
