Car Insurance

Buckled_Rims

If you think power gets you out of a situation then sorry, you're soon to be a dead duck! Impatience with power kills more young people then anything. I think you've been listening to Jeremy Clarkson to much.

If I was the road minister, all new drivers for their first year would be limited to a 1 litre engined car with only one 1 passenger allowed.

I drove all over the UK in a 1.0 Yaris a few years ago and I can't think of a time I need more power.

I'm not saying I know best, but having almost been killed as an 18 year old and as a 45 year old, I do have some experience in accidents

zanes

So you're looking at ~2 year old cars for your first car, and complaining about the cost of insurance??

Also, 1.4 as a first car? I lol'd. Seriously, with newer cars a 1.1 106 or similar is liable to be just as quick and capable (and more than capable of "Erm, think you'll find that was 68 officer.....")

Case in point;

New model 1.25 fester, 0-60 in 17.5
Old 1.1 106, 0-60 in 14

As for the safety argument, don't crash.

dhope

Pritchard5 wrote:

But on a serious note It has to be quite new and over a 1.2

not just because it rhymes but also because we in our family believe it will be safer for the type of driving i will be doing

Unfortunely they in the insurance companies have heard the argument before and, statistically, it's bollocks. Bigger engine, more likely to crash. I'm sure you're different to all the other 17 year olds (I was too and so were all my friends) but you'll have to put up with high quotes if you insist on getting a car that, generally speaking, is too good for you.

Nice job with the parents though, I couldnt persuade them to get me anything newer than an 8 year old car.

Mr_Cellophane

Buckled_Rims wrote:

as a 45 year old, I do have some experience in accidents

perhaps you should be the one with high premiums then.

Wallace1492

Power does not help prevent accidents. Safe, sensible driving does.

Get a smaller engined car - cheaper, more fuel efficient, better for the environment.
Use public transport where you can, nowt wrong with it.
Cut down as much of the driving as possible, more phone meetings, etc.

You have come on saying you are sensible, yet still insist on bigger car. I think everyone wanted a bigger car when they were 17.... Be really sensible and get a smaller car and try and cut down on mileage.

tailwindhome

Wallace1492 wrote:

Power does not help prevent accidents.

Impresses the Burds though

gtvlusso

Hmmm - My first car was £575 a Citroen 2 CV - insurance: £340 from memory......

From 18 I had company cars until recently, however, getting prrof of no claims was a nightmare from my company as they folded just after I left:

Mercedes ML270CDI with 0 no claims 35 year old married couple £420.....mileage is less that 3000 per year.

Bicycle insurance £170 for bikes + liability cover

Motorbikes, my last bike was a Ducati 998 SPS - £120 per annum fully comp (I have/had full motorbike no claims)

To be honest, it is daylight robbery with insurance, and any way they can get away without paying out, they will find.....

The words: 17 year old male and newish car = bad news. Buy an old wreck for a couple of years and a save a few quid for a great car in your twenties.

plowmar

Sudden flash of inspiration :idea: :idea:

You say that car is mainly(?) to be used to travel for the company, so why do not your parents pay an appropriate % of the premium as a gift from their pockets,(to avoid tax implications), then you will still be insured in your name and build up your own NCB.

Just a thought if they do not want to go the company car way. Would that cover you for private use?

suzyb

TailWindHome wrote:

Wallace1492 wrote:

Power does not help prevent accidents.

Impresses the Burds though

Not really, it just makes us wonder what you're compensating for.

tailwindhome

suzyb wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Wallace1492 wrote:

Power does not help prevent accidents.

Impresses the Burds though

Not really, it just makes us wonder what you're compensating for.

You say that..but we both know the truth.

bails87

Okay, so the OP is 17, male, no NCD, won't do Passplus, wants a new, expensive, large engined car and won't even consider a diesel, but is moaning that insuring the car is expensive...

Pritchard5

won't do Passplus, wants a new, expensive, large engined car and won't even consider a diesel, but is moaning that insuring the car is expensive...

I never said i wouldn't do pass plus, but the insurance company which has given me the lowest quotes doesnt recognise it, so whats the point?
''LARGE ENGINED CAR'' its a 1.4 its not like im strapping a chevy v8 to a car is it
And I haven't said i wouldn't like a diesel, but if you have a look at insurance quotes, diesels are actually higher. I think its because they have turbo chargers and have considerable more torque than petrol engines.

zanes

Insurance GROUP is higher =/= higher quotes (Necessarily)

bails87

Seriously, just get a car with a smaller engine. For a 17 year old, a 1.4 is actually at the higher end of a 'normal' engine, so yes, it is a large engine. Also, you named a 1.8 and a couple of 1.6s, so they're definitely on the large side.

I drive a 1.1, I've driven over to the west coast of Wales, as well as the Suffolk coast and the Isle of Wight loads of times, all long journeys, all fine.

You want an impossible combination. If you want a big engined, powerful car, then you've got to pay for it.

More power won't get you out of situations, brakes and good observations will. Have you ever even driven on the motorway, or are you just repeating stuff you've heard to justify a faster car?

Near enough any modern car will do 70 (apart from some stupid electric car or something ), get a 107 or 206 or a Yaris or a Fiesta diesel or something.

Pritchard5

so how come quinn direct will insure 17 year olds on a group 15 mg tf sports car for £2500?
work that one out :P

crazy i know

UndercoverElephant

lost_in_thought wrote:

Ah come now Aidy. We all wanted a cool car when we were 17. And diesel is just not cool.

When I was 17 I drove my Dad's old, beige Lada estate...



And yet I still managed to suitably impress the lovely Mrs. Elephant. I seem to remember that having access to any car was extremely cool at that age. OP, you have no chance of getting anything much to be honest, Top Gear managed to come up eith the following a while back:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gear_c ... -year-olds

zanes

Pritchard5 wrote:

so how come quinn direct will insure 17 year olds on a group 15 mg tf sports car for £2500?
work that one out :P

crazy i know

Some random bloke earlier in the thread wrote:

Insurance GROUP is higher =/= higher quotes (Necessarily)

Buy whatever car you want, put up with the insurance cost. Clearly whatever we all say you'll keep complaining and refuse to listen to any advice cos "You know better". I still say for the damage potential a car gives you insurance is cheap.

bails87

Pritchard5 wrote:

so how come quinn direct will insure 17 year olds on a group 15 mg tf sports car for £2500?
work that one out :P

crazy i know

Maybe TF owners, statistically, are very safe. (because they're all old?)

bails87

Pritchard5 wrote:

so how come quinn direct will insure 17 year olds on a group 15 mg tf sports car for £2500?
work that one out :P

crazy i know

Some random bloke earlier in the thread wrote:

Insurance GROUP is higher =/= higher quotes (Necessarily)

that means a higher insurance group does NOT necessarily equal higher quotes....

tailwindhome

Pritchard5 wrote:

so how come quinn direct will insure 17 year olds on a group 15 mg tf sports car for £2500?
work that one out :P

crazy i know

I be suprised if they still would

They went bust in Ireland - agressive discounting was a factor apparently

zanes

bails87 wrote:

Pritchard5 wrote:

so how come quinn direct will insure 17 year olds on a group 15 mg tf sports car for £2500?
work that one out :P

crazy i know

Some random bloke earlier in the thread wrote:

Insurance GROUP is higher =/= higher quotes (Necessarily)

that means a higher insurance group does NOT necessarily equal higher quotes....

Apologies for the use of maffs notation and schizz on a 17 year olds thread.....

:oops:

unixnerd

I never said i wouldn't do pass plus, but the insurance company which has given me the lowest quotes doesnt recognise it, so whats the point?

The point is that more training will reduce your risk of having an accident. I know when I was that age and just passed my test I'd not want to hear that, but it's true.

And next year you'll have a year's no claim's bonus. Some of the companies offering decent quotes then probably will accept it.

Kieran_Burns

Pritchard5 wrote:

so how come quinn direct will insure 17 year olds on a group 15 mg tf sports car for £2500?
work that one out :P

crazy i know

It's an MG TF. Statistically you will only spend an average of 3 days of the year actually driving it on the road.

The rest of the time it will be in garage, broken.

Or by the side of the road, broken.

Or on the back of a flatbed, broken.

Or on the drive, waiting to break.

Kieran_Burns

Pritchard5 wrote:

won't do Passplus, wants a new, expensive, large engined car and won't even consider a diesel, but is moaning that insuring the car is expensive...

I never said i wouldn't do pass plus, but the insurance company which has given me the lowest quotes doesnt recognise it, so whats the point?

Have you run a quotes comparison if you DID have Pass Plus?

It seems like you 've looked at the quotes for not having PP and then saying - "Oh they don't recognise it"

So go look for ones that do, and see if they're cheaper....

Incidentally - it's a right of passage to have a crap car when you start driving. Hell, most of my mates had mini's (not small BMWs) and learnt all sorts of car maintenance - through necessity of course This is what being young is all about - you will not get a decent car with more power than a bilious fart until you have some NCD and experience; unless you are willing to pay for it.

prawny

The car with the lowest insurance group in the UK now is the Toyota Aygo/citroen C1 Pug 107. Or a bottom of the range Panda.

What most people don't think about when it comes to claims costs is that you don't have to hit anything really. If you are driving in the car with 3 mates (which you will) and stick it in a hedge there is 3 3rd party injury claims straight away.

These days you don't need a big engine in a small car they are much more efficient, I have driven old Ka's every where and they are just as happy on the motorway as my old 2.5 V6 mondeo was.

The landrover idea is one I had when I was learning, didn't work, the cheapest cars are small 1000cc or less 3 door petrols. More doors is a small load so is diesel.

Go to a toyota dealers get a 2nd hand aygo, be happy.

I've been a motor insurance underwriter for the last 6-7 years I forget how long because I've bored myself half to death.

lost_in_thought

Aygos are great little cars, I had one as a courtesy car a few years ago.

Oh and Quinn used to insure anyone on anything. Didn't last long though, they're teetering on the edge of failure, possibly because they're the ones who are currently paying for my spine to be realigned, and my lawyers are rather aggressive.

They're like the subprime lender of the car insurance world.

Aidy

lost_in_thought wrote:

Oh and Quinn used to insure anyone on anything. Didn't last long though, they're teetering on the edge of failure, possibly because they're the ones who are currently paying for my spine to be realigned, and my lawyers are rather aggressive.

They were certainly useful to get me a couple of years of no claims

the_hundredth_idiot

All through my 20s I had a Ford Escort 1.3, which was a few years old when I bought it. Kept me going from leaving university until, at the age of 29, my new girlfriend (oh she's no longer my girlfriend ... she's now my wife) persuaded me to buy something more expensive and with fewer seats. At that age, the extra insurance wasn't so much of a nuisance.

I can't remember how many miles I did in that Escort - but most of those miles were motorway miles travelling all over the country (visiting friends and family, walking holidays in remote parts of Britain, ...) and I never felt that I needed a bigger engine. And a modern 1.0 Toyota engine has more power in a smaller, lighter car - so you might want a bigger engine but you really don't need a bigger engine - that's utter BS.

Your choice, though. So either get a car you really want but can't afford (you had a BMW on your list - you're 17 FFS). Or get a car you're less keen on but can afford. There's no way a new Mini is the cheapest car you could insure.

mkchu84

When I was looking for my 1st car, I thought I'd need a bigger engine too because I'd be doing a lot of motorway miles. The reality is, the only difference I've noticed between my 1.6 and my sister's 1.1 corsa was the ability to empty the fuel tank a lot quicker.

If, at the end of the day, you've convinced yourself that a newer, bigger engined car is worth paying more for, it shouldn't be too hard to convince yourself the insurance is worth it too.

FeynmanC

First car was a 1litre 205 - brilliant car and did motorways no probs (even got it upto 80mph once! lol) It had a great chassis, so was still fun to drive but limited power, so I couldnt get myself into too much trouble. The insurance was expensive, but luckily my parents paid as they had moved away from the school me and my kid bro went to, so I became his chauffeur

A few years ago I got a 205 1.6GTI - the chassis was still fantastic but my many years of experience meant I could handle the power and still get into very little trouble but have a lot of fun. The no claims bonus meant I could afford it too.

It got written off when a woman in an MGF (had one of them too) reversed into me in a carpark and caved in the passenger side - poor car. It was one of very few remaining original 205GTI's that hadn't been boyracered up