Whats happening to insurance premiums?

[Escadrille Ecosse]

2 minutes ago, thebrookster said:

So to state you are subsidising all commercial vehicles is wrong, because you do not subsidise either mine or John's commercial vehicles.

Got me on a technicality there Phil. Shall I hand you my sword or fall on it?

[JohnD]

1 hour ago, thebrookster said:

You are kind of the exception to the rule John, as the trailer is defining your speed limits. Just remember if you drive the van without the trailer only the motorway limit changes.

No, Phil!   Without a trailer my van's Mway limit is 70.

Check that Gov.uk page for your truck's limit.

[thebrookster]

48 minutes ago, JohnD said:

No, Phil!   Without a trailer my van's Mway limit is 70.

Check that Gov.uk page for your truck's limit.

That's what I meant, John! The only change in speed limits is the mway limit goes up when you remove the trailer! All the other limits (50 on SC, 60 on DC) remain the same, trailer or not.

[JohnD]

Thanks for that, Phil!

You still at sea?

[Nick Jones]

2 hours ago, Escadrille Ecosse said:

Got me on a technicality there Phil. Shall I hand you my sword or fall on it?

We’ll settle for you going out to the garage and working some more of your composites magic 

[thebrookster]

10 hours ago, JohnD said:

Thanks for that, Phil!

You still at sea?

Aye, unfortunately. I was supposed to be relieved mid December, but unsurprisingly my reliever was mysteriously taken ill.

Heading back up the Black Sea for next loading at the end of the month, so earliest chance for relief is looking like February now, which of course assumes that Omicron doesn't stick an oar in somewhere unwanted!

[JohnD]

Ooooer, Phil!      Let's hope Gospodin Putin is more concerned with Byeloruss than the Crimea!    Channel 5's "Warship" series included edge-of-seat encounters in the Black Sea, and there wasn't even a war there at the time.   Thinking of you.

John

Edited January 8, 2022 by JohnD

[JohnD]

Back to insurance, and more evidence that whoever runs insurance companies are in fact scaly reptiles.     The Guardian's Comsumer column today tells of a BMW 740 of 1997, the pride 'n' joy of the owner, damaged in an encounter with a drunk driver.   The insurer decided from photos that it was Category B, unrepairable, refused to send an inspector and offered a paltry £4K in damages.     They said that the car was theirs now, and even after the Guardian was involved by the desperate owner, the car was scrapped!     The owner has been offered more but nothing like his estimate of its worth.

The lessons, not mentioned in the Guardian article, are "Agreed value" insurance, which we are all familiar with, and that you should not allow a damaged car to be taken away to some storage pound where it becomes the virtual property of the insurer.   Have it taken to a sympathetic repairer or your own home, wher there is no doubt who owns the car.

John

[Nick Jones]

The car is NOT theirs until you have accepted their offer and got the money. But hard to enforce if they’ve kidnapped it.  They are indeed scaly reptiles, and sometimes there’s corruption involved too.

[PaulAA]

Early on Christmas morn, one of the local residents decided to take assorted family members drifting in his SUV on the freshly fallen and frozen snow hereabouts. Needless to say, he took the corner outside our apartment block too wide and smacked the rear of Junior's W124. Fortunately, he was seen and had the nouse to return and pin a note of his contact details to the windscreen.

Not too much damage - punctured bumper and trim, smashed rear light and a little bodywork reshaping on the rear wing - but several parts, including the driver's side rear light, are made of unobtanium and the quote from a reputable repair shop was c. £1,500 (bear with me on this - life is cheaper in this neck of the woods). The perpatrator's insurer is of the reptilian persuasion and their loss adjuster advised them to offer 25% of that figure in a dismissive 'take it or leave it' cover note.

Our preferred workshop reassured us that the work would be done at the original figure, on the basis that they have a department dedicated to fighting this one particular insurer - Link4. Apparently, the insurer concedes to 80% of their approaches and pays the full cost of the work. The remaining 20% they win in the small claims court. A timely reminder that Third Party insurance is not there to protect the innocent - it is there to fulfil the requirements of the law.

[Nick Jones]

I’m pretty sure that’s not how it works here….. you get shagged and stay shagged…. Nice approach though. I wish you success. Surprised the rear light is a problem. Still alot of those around and not a few still doing taxi duty….

[Nick Jones]

Scaly reptiles are still at it. 23% rise for Sootmonster insurance this year. I will test the market but most (the ones I’ve heard of that don’t have 1 star reviews anyway) seem to be similar. 
 

I haven’t had a 23% pay rise (or indeed any pay rise) though as my employer have put their prices by more than that over the last 18 months to cover their “rising costs”, seems to me I should be one of those rising costs….

[Escadrille Ecosse]

12 hours ago, Nick Jones said:

I haven’t had a 23% pay rise (or indeed any pay rise) though as my employer have put their prices by more than that over the last 18 months to cover their “rising costs”, seems to me I should be one of those rising costs….

It seems to be a well tested reason excuse that one...

Mine not due for a few months yet. Not looking forward to it.