boaby

my policy has been cancelled by the insurance co. as i didnt realise that ncd couldn't be shared between vehicles

see https://passionford.com/forum/insura...insurance.html for more

anyway, ive emailed and asked if i'll be refunded in full (ive paid for a service ive not received), what are the chances of my getting it back?

D16PJM

if you paid in full i think you get a percentage back if after 14 days

Carlos-Titx

It should say in your policy documents some where of what percentage you will get against duration of the policy.

Oranoco

Insurance co have cancelled as you gave incorrect info, albeit unknowingly, regarding your NCB. Not sure if that might make a problem for you with regards to a refund.

Winds me up though that they don't let you share your NCB and you have to build 2 lots. But they expect to penalise you on both policies if you claim on one. Seem a tad unfair? I think so

dojj

iTrader: (3)

i don't think we should have to pay insurance more than once until we have a crash, not this every year bollocks

drive me crazy

if its recently been taken out ,assuming its a annual policy divide it by 12 take out the number of months its been going add admin fee usually 40-50 bucks for their trouble you should get the remainder back ,if you cancelled it will tell you in the policy it does vary.

1.9 xr2 on 40's

wont go along normal lines because its not really your fault, i had the same thing and while if you cancel it they do the 75% 60% 50% bollocks i just got refunded everything bar the 2 weeks i drove which was less than £20 (and did not include any admin shite either so dont get pulled over for that lark)

drive me crazy

if its inside the cooling off period full refund they should of checked it anyway,but dont bank on it they are starving bastards after all.

boaby

too update, i didnt get a refund minus about 50 notes.

so i got 1000 nectar points for the original insurance and now i'm awaiting a meerkat

Psycho Warren

iTrader: (5)

yeah it is rediculous.

it is no claims discount. the point being "no claims" not "no claims on this vehicle".

They seem to change its meaning to suit them, ie "no claims" when you have an accident so they can rip you off on all policies, yet "no claims on this vehicle" when you want to get a second car.

I refuse to accept they have reasonable grounds in their actuaries to not take into account NCD earned on other cars.

Clearly a good driving history is a lesser risk wether you have 1 vehicle or 10.

They do it when you add extra drivers as they assume youll be driving less.

so they understand the principals just chose not to use it so they can rip us off more.


I do hope the so called independant investigation into the insurance industry actually does get full access and is truley independant, with the results meaning the government thus have to act.

however we all know they either wont get the access needed or will not be independant hence the rip off and unfair behaviour wont be exposed.

dojj

iTrader: (3)

apparently if you have more than one vehicle you pay more as you are a bigger risk with more cars to claim for, rather than a smaller risk because you can't drive all your cars at the same time

Rod-Tarry

I have 48years ncb on one car & 16 on the other .

If a 17 year old in his Nova writes off a Ferrari who pays, he dont cos they wont insure him the following year, so its the rest of you that pays. You guys want discounts for everything, they aint a charity but in business to make money.
Get old, Dont crash is the only way to get cheap insurance & long may it continue .

Psycho Warren

iTrader: (5)

to be fair there is an element of truth in that. eg you have a break in for keys and 2 cars are stolen.

one crash outside your house could write off both cars.

however compared to the full sweet of factors included in a premium, IMO it is miniscule extra risk and certainly far less extra risk compared to the fact that your mileage is shared between the two cars and therefore the driving risk on each car is less proportionate to the mileage split between the two.
They are a business that plays unfair. Virtually any other sector or market where competition is limited is regulated by the government to ensure we get a fair deal. however insurance is nowhere near enough regulated IMO.

We dont have a choice with insurance if we want to drive so they can all charge what they want and even conspire to keep prices high and there is nothing we as consumers can do about it. that is why the government is supposed to regulate such things.

They stamped down on supermarket price fixing and unfair practices in other industries so why not car insurance???

ive no problem with them being a business and making a profit however the whole industry is fucked from within. Just look at the compo culture.

Outsourcing Claims management may seem cheaper for an insurance company on a non fault claim, but because the whole industry does it now, then that company will get in a balanced spread of risk just as many fault claims. All that happens is ALL insurance claim costs go up. Insurers raise premiums to compensate. So the ONLY looser is us the consumer and for no good logical reason.

fuzzy

you cant try to second guess insurance companies using common sense or logic because theres often none involved in their decisions.

Psycho Warren

iTrader: (5)

exactly why it needs regulating fuzzy.

Oranoco

Whilst I agree with you in part can you not see why it is unjust for them to treat you like a new driver and rob you blind not taking into consideration your xx years of claim free driving?