Why would the year you bought a car affect the insurance premium?

Adam · 7 Aug 2012 at 14:51

Example:

If I select that I bought a car in 2010 (this was done in error) the price is around £760

If I select that I bought a car in 2012 the price is around £930.

What feasible explanation can be given for such a huge jump in the price of the policy?

Hxc · 7 Aug 2012 at 14:52

Because you have experience driving the car without crashing.

Scythian · 7 Aug 2012 at 14:54

I think he meant how old the car itself was, not how long he had been driving it.

Edit: d'oh, misread thread title - ignore.

Brookert · 7 Aug 2012 at 14:55

Data they have must show that one is much lower risk than another.

Sucks, but insurance is all about statistical risk.

Adam · 7 Aug 2012 at 14:55

Hxc said:
Because you have experience driving the car without crashing.

Fine, point taken. But I could have been a named driver and never actually drive the car!

I don't see how that justifies such a large increase.

Addicted · 7 Aug 2012 at 14:56

Adam said:
Fine, point taken. But I could have been a named driver and never actually drive the car!

I don't see how that justifies such a large increase.

Yes you could, but that's just how it works.

doll · 7 Aug 2012 at 14:56

Car value.

Adam · 7 Aug 2012 at 14:57

doll said:
Car value.

That's irrelevant as the market value would remain the same.

Hxc · 7 Aug 2012 at 14:58

Adam said:
Fine, point taken. But I could have been a named driver and never actually drive the car!

You could indeed, but this is very unlikely. Insurance works on probabilities.

It's in the same vein as specialists refusing to insure me on my MX5 when I was 19 because I'd never driven anything rear wheel drive before. (they're still hideously uncompetitive now on anything at all, but I am seemingly perpetually the exception to the rule with insurance)

The one I find most interesting is the fact that the value you declare the car as can have a significant impact on the price, even though it doesn't actually make that much difference come claim time. For example, quoting for a 350Z (likely to be my next car), putting a value of 5500 vs 8000, the £8000 quote is cheaper by about £100. I know it'll be backed up by data but I still find it curious, nonetheless.

Janesy B · 7 Aug 2012 at 15:01

Scythian said:
I think he meant how old the car itself was, not how long he had been driving it.

Well no, if you read the OP it clearly states he gets a different price depending on what year he bought the car.

[TW]Fox · 7 Aug 2012 at 15:05

Adam said:
Fine, point taken. But I could have been a named driver and never actually drive the car!

I don't see how that justifies such a large increase.

Think of it the other way round. You get a discount for having had your car a while.

Kenai · 7 Aug 2012 at 15:22

Makes perfect sense to me - the longer you've owned a car, the better you know it. You know how hard you can brake in emergencies, how hard it will turn, whether it's suddenly appalling to drive in the rain compared to the dry etc. etc. Things that you more than likely won't know about a car you've just bought.

Of course there will be exceptions, such as people buying a car of the same model and similar things but overall it seems a largely sensible thing to me.

merlin · 7 Aug 2012 at 15:33

Kenai said:
Makes perfect sense to me - the longer you've owned a car, the better you know it.

^

Adam · 7 Aug 2012 at 16:02

That's me told then

OpenToSuggestions · 7 Aug 2012 at 18:28

So for me, my car is legally owned by my Dad. Even though I bought it off him and it is mine. This way we have owned it since 2008 rather than 2012, which lowers the insurance. It also keeps the number of owners to a minimum. A downside to this is that a fair few companies refuse to insure me as the policy holder as I am not the owner.

[TW]Fox · 7 Aug 2012 at 18:41

OpenToSuggestions said:
So for me, my car is legally owned by my Dad. Even though I bought it off him and it is mine. This way we have owned it since 2008 rather than 2012, which lowers the insurance. It also keeps the number of owners to a minimum. A downside to this is that a fair few companies refuse to insure me as the policy holder as I am not the owner.

You are the owner - you bought it from him. It's now your car.

What you mean is that he's the registered keeper of the car. The registered keeper is not neccesarily the owner. It even tells you this in enormous text right across the front of your V5 Vehicle Registration Document.

You should re-register it with you as the keeper.

Dogbreath · 7 Aug 2012 at 18:46

Hxc said:
The one I find most interesting is the fact that the value you declare the car as can have a significant impact on the price, even though it doesn't actually make that much difference come claim time. For example, quoting for a 350Z (likely to be my next car), putting a value of 5500 vs 8000, the £8000 quote is cheaper by about £100. I know it'll be backed up by data but I still find it curious, nonetheless.

That is interesting, must have a play with this when I get a new quote. I suppose £5500 is pretty much at the bottom of the 350Z market - perhaps the premium this tends to reflect the type of person that buys a performance shed?

OpenToSuggestions · 7 Aug 2012 at 18:51

[TW]Fox;22514558 said:
You should re-register it with you as the keeper.

Which I won't do because then for insurance purposes I bought it in August 2012, not May 2008, which adds £100 to my policy.

[TW]Fox · 7 Aug 2012 at 18:58

OpenToSuggestions said:
Which I won't do because then for insurance purposes I bought it in August 2012, not May 2008, which adds £100 to my policy.

He isnt the keeper of your car though is he?

OpenToSuggestions · 7 Aug 2012 at 18:59

[TW]Fox;22514733 said:
He isnt the keeper of your car though is he?

Doesn't matter. I am the policy holder and the main driver. He is a named driver.