Premiums for youngsters these days are rridiculous and massivly over egged compared to the risk - they are an easy target for the insurers and get stung.

Bull ****.. Im not long from being a teenager and If I owned a insurance business I would try and out price insuring any teenagers, or perhaps not quote them at all. Due to the fact the majority of teenage lads that get into a car thinking they know it all and they are the best driver on the road. Granted allot arent like this, but it only takes one accident into a bus could potentially become a 15 million pound claim!! All for say £2000 insurance???

Haven't we all been stupid when we were in our teens? I wouldn't have even known to declare mods when I was 19 because I didn't know anything about anything, although I thought I knew everything about everything.

Being stupid isnt anything to do with it, your clearly asked when getting insurance is the car modified or adapted in any way. Which would tell me that if its adapted or modified they will want to know.

So what has changed - other than vastly increased premiums for youngsters and what has justified that if the risks are similar?

Don't get me wrong the lad in the original post should have declared mods in the same way that I do but, as I said the inconsistency in pricing changes makes me wonder and is more than likely a reason why he didn't.

My brother at 17 got insured in a 1.0l corsa in the year 2000 which would be group 1 or 2 insurance, costing him 2k to insure. 7 years later I got insured in a 1.6l vtr saxo insurance group 7, again aged 17 for £1400. £600 cheaper for a car 3 times higher group!! Going by this over the last decade insurance has went down for younger drivers. Nothing was any different in the two policies, same address etc.

and why should they if he has breached the terms of the policy

Read the whole thread, he doesn't believe they should pay out he is simply warning people of what happened.

100% understand why this has been posted - as a reminder to declare all mods!

A friends 19 year old son has just written off his car. A clio he paid nearly £8K for ,a year ago.

He'd lowered the suspension and fitted a Coke can exhaust ,without telling them.

They have refused to pay up..........

Although this line of refusing to pay up is in theory not correct, He is lucky he is alive and still walking (the streets)

Effectively by not declaring the mods to the car, leaves the policy invalid as the contract terms are broken, if the police decided to take this further then not only would he be done with

- Wrekless driving

they could also add

- Uninsured

- No road tax

As anoyingly the law changed not long ago it means without valid insurance the road tax should not be on the car, Meaning unless you have both the road tax is not valid.

Its a nice reminder... Check you are insured for everything.... ITS THE LAW!

His own fault...

However...insurance prices for 17-25 year olds is silly expensive, i have a friend and he's not the most well off person in the world but he past his test's and tryed to find a car he could insure for a reasonable amount he could afford....

5 years later he still rides to work on a pushbike because he cannot afford the costs to insure a car at a reasonable price & the cost of fuel prices, he rides 10miles there and back everyday.

i couldnt afford to insure my old 1.5l civic 4 years ago for anyless than £1600..

Im not blaming anyone for this as its a mixture of; inflation, tax, crashes, insurance companys, etc etc but end of the day why dont 80 year old drives have a premium of £1k plus? there more likely to have a stroke or some sort of sudden attack at the wheel aren't they?

Just my 2p

Im not blaming anyone for this as its a mixture of; inflation, tax, crashes, insurance companys, etc etc but end of the day why dont 80 year old drives have a premium of £1k plus? there more likely to have a stroke or some sort of sudden attack at the wheel aren't they?

Because actuarial and statistical results show that the under 21's are far more likely to have a claim, and often a more expensive claim, than the driver over 75.

It's probably equally the case that more older/ancient drivers contribute to the cause of accidents through the inability to exceed 30mph on any road type & coupled in some cases with the complete lack of spacial awareness. Sure flat caps play a part in this!

I'll await crucifixion from the ageing driver contingent

I know it's not a popular thought, but at least when I passed, it was a case of most people getting an older car (say a fiesta) with a 1.0 L engine, no special bits and no modifications.

Then it was either third party fire and theft only or comprehensive with an excess for accidental damage of more than the car was worth.

It's a bit silly that everyone wants to have a nice car for car number one and also expects it to not cost a bomb.

Edited 20 March, 201313 yr by cheezemonkhai

I totally agree. I spent 1300 quid on a group 1 Fiat Panda and was pleased with that. Friends had similarly aged Micras, Fiestas and so on.

^^ +1

Learn how to drive on something it doesn't matter what happens to it

Gain experience and get something decent once you can afford it, appreciate it and look after it

Makes for a better driver, having gone through naff cars with little power.

Makes for a more considerate driver too ie having an understanding what it's like to drive a naff/lower power car with weaker brakes etc

I know it's not a popular thought, but at least when I passed, it was a case of most people getting an older car (say a fiesta) with a 1.0 L engine, no special bits and no modifications.

Then it was either third party fire and theft only or comprehensive with an excess for accidental damage of more than the car was worth.

It's a bit silly that everyone wants to have a nice car for car number one and also expects it to not cost a bomb.

Snap. In 1998 - I paid £1300 to insure an MG Metro worth <£500, that is comparable to today's prices.

Ollie

Edited 21 March, 201313 yr by SkyInsurance

In 1993 I paid £350 (TPF&T) to insure a 1974 Morris Marina. I think I paid £100 for the car.

Didn't need any "fun" mods either, leaf-spring suspension meant it held the road like a bar of soap. Learned a lot about car control.

Snap. In 1998 - I paid £1300 to insure an MG Metro worth <£500, that is comparable to today's prices.

Ollie

And you probably could have insured a Metro 1.0 City for half that

My 1000CL Panda cost £500 in the first year's insurance in the early 90s

I'm not sure on this but my understanding is factory fitted options are fine and do not need to be declared but anything fitted afterwards does have to be declared:

Direct Line certainly do want to know about factory fitted options. When you consider that some of the prestige stuff out there can nearly double in price when all the options are thrown at it you can see why. Nobody would want to be paid out for a standard car when theirs had all the pricey options on it.

Direct Line certainly do want to know about factory fitted options. When you consider that some of the prestige stuff out there can nearly double in price when all the options are thrown at it you can see why. Nobody would want to be paid out for a standard car when theirs had all the pricey options on it.

So what do people who got the last VRSs that seem to have standard fit Xenons say, unlike ones from a few months back?

This is why this is so difficult to work with.

I'm not saying an options loaded car shouldn't be a bigger 'risk' but surely the value you state covers that?

So what do people who got the last VRSs that seem to have standard fit Xenons say, unlike ones from a few months back?

This is why this is so difficult to work with.

I'm not saying an options loaded car shouldn't be a bigger 'risk' but surely the value you state covers that?

Who knows how they work. I don't trust any of 'em. All I do is tell them about EVERYTHING. That way they can't say I didn't. Declaring factory options doesn't increase the premium it's just a notary thing. They did want an extra £200 when I told them about the tinted windows on my last car...

I peeled it off.

Edited 22 March, 201313 yr by JB-)

1300 miles over estimated mileage generally would result in an extra premium being charged rather than no insurance. That should be escalated as it's likely to have a positive outcome. It's unlikely the MOT and policy inception fall on the same day for starters though some underwriters will only offer 3rd party on a restricted mileage policy if you go over but they're normally very up front about it.

Not declaring modifications can vary wildly, I've been charged £80 for non genuine wheels before and also had underwriters who didn't care as long as they were OE of the same size, same for options. Heck I pay twice the money for a bog standard Fabia than I did for a heavily modified roadster with everything declared.

Elephant were fine with my putting standard Skoda alloys on my car but for anything else its silly money for me at the moment. First year driving at 23 and insurance on the 1.2 Fabia comes in at around £1600 with a child (Yes you have to declare children too!)

Hence 1 it's a 1.2 no point really doing anything mod wise to it and 2 the cost is really not worth it! I'd rather stay covered and not change anything till im 25 when prices drop and I have something a bit nippier!

My son is 17 has a little arosa 1.0 with black box and cost him £1,900 he's driven really well and next October his insurance premium will be less than £500 , no mods ,standard as I wouldn't allow anything but he never asked for any mods, he will keep black box in for another 12 months, I believe this is the only way to insure the you guns

In terms of options its not just to do with the declared value, its also the consideration of the repair costs too.

Declaring u have children is something likely to bring your premium down I would have thought.

Until recently I worked as a claims handler for an insurance company. Happy to help if anyone needs any general advice when it come to claims.

If you were doing that Job you might know the history of why they used to ask about Partners or Spouse even if they were not drivers,

that was because they might become a Driver/Learner and there would be an application to Insure them.

Children is a term that might cover the age 0-16.

Parents of Young children might be considered as a lesser risk and safer drivers.

Teenage children can be considered as a liability even if not yet Drivers.

Costs of Repairs or Replacement of the Insured Vehicle is a known cost because you know the vehicle.

The Millions of claims that can come in from an accident of fatalities caused by that vehicle is the un-known, and

the calculated risk that is Insurance.

With Modifications it is not always anything to do with repair or replacement,

it is if they make the vehicle more of a Theft Magnet or the possibility of damage to the vehicle to steal them.

Often there is no Rhyme or Reason to Quotes and Policy costs.

You would expect a 'Claims Handler' or anyone working in Insurance to know that.

george

Direct Line certainly do want to know about factory fitted options. When you consider that some of the prestige stuff out there can nearly double in price when all the options are thrown at it you can see why. Nobody would want to be paid out for a standard car when theirs had all the pricey options on it.

All those options therefore are covered in the value the car is insured for. There is no need to cover them again.

Who knows how they work. I don't trust any of 'em. All I do is tell them about EVERYTHING. That way they can't say I didn't. Declaring factory options doesn't increase the premium it's just a notary thing. They did want an extra £200 when I told them about the tinted windows on my last car...

I peeled it off.

The build sticker on my skoda (stock) has about 15 different option and build codes on it. Do you go through and explain to them what each of those are too?

What was their justification for charging over tinted windows? Were they just rear tints or whole car?

George, insurance companies have different underwriting rules and will consider different things to increase or improve the risk. My offer of assistance is more in the way of if people have a claim. I'm not pretending to be any expert in motor underwriting.

My advice as someone that did deal with Brokers, Underwriters & Loss Adjusters or Vehicle Examiners is.

If someone is making a claim and receiving settlement offers that they are not happy with,

employing their own 'Loss Adjuster' can often be the best money they will ever spend.

After all, the Insurance Companies 'Loss Adjuster' is trying to reduce the costs and payment on behalf of the Underwriter'.

Can be well worth for the not very great expense to get their Own Engineers Report carried out if un-happy with the Quotes and figures being done on behalf of the Underwriter.

george

Agree with you a lot there. Can be very much worth it to get an independent engineers report.Usually would cost around £60. The engineer should be IAEA registered and you can find a local engineer on IAEA-ONLINE.ORG.

So what do people who got the last VRSs that seem to have standard fit Xenons say, unlike ones from a few months back?

The vRS SE xenons will be something from the factory, i.e standard spec for the SE, so no worries there. It would be different for an older vRS to retrofit the same kit.

why spend £8000 on a clio

I've just liked this post so I can see the popular badge with the star come up......Oooo! look at that badge. lol