OT - Insurance ?

Why does simply adding a spouse to your insurance reduce the premium?

i.e. If I add my missus, who doesn't want to drive so I'd not thought of doing it, the Saga premium drop, what seems like 10% and this seems to be fairly common.

Andy C

Good tip, does it ask any questions as to the spouse having a driving licence? Regards David

Perhaps they have to do a new (instead of renewal) quote, and they're sometimes cheaper? Having said that, when we added my dad to our (already joint) policy, it went up by about 25.

Yes, it asks how long she's had one and whether she has any outstanding offences. The answers are over 10 years and no. She passed her test but simply isn't interested in driving but of course, that doesn't seem to matter. I'm just not clear why the risk is lessened !

Andy C

Wonder if it were her policy and you added a husband to it would the same apply? Some say women generally are a better insurance risk than men.

Saved my Girlfiend =A350, adding her dad would have put it up by 70

fairly common.

My wife gets a cheaper quote adding me to her policy, and I get a cheaper quote adding her to my policy. Great fun :-)

Because that is the boring option, and not having a spouse who drives your car makes you less predictable.

a few years ago i got a 650 cc motorbike, playing with insurance quotes i found i could save about 60 quid by adding my girlfriend to the policy, and i answered the questions about her license truthfully... which was she only had a provisional motorbike license and a CBT cert.... i.e. the biggest bike she could legaly ride was a 125cc on L plates,

i did this for 2 years, but on the 3rd year the quote questions changed to say a spouse must have a valid license to ride the bike being insured.

;-)

I believe it's to do with 'shared use'. eg. If you ride / drive a vehicle singularly you might not be as careful as if others also have (need) use of it.

The insurance discount only (generally) appears though when the 'additional rider / drive' is of a lower (perceived) risk than the initial person.

eg. Adding our 21 year old daughter to any of our car / bike policies raises the premium considerably whilst adding me to hers reduces it some.

I do believe they sometimes ask (and I'm not sure if it's specific to car or bike) "has the person been regularly riding / driving over the last x years ..." etc, possibly to negate any discount gained by adding a 'phantom' extra rider / driver?

Years ago I was stopped in my Morris Minor van and asked 'Is this your vehicle sir?' To which I replied "Yes". He looked at me and said "Mrs Betty Smith ...?" ;-)

Yes, the van was mine but my Mum was the registered keeper, it was insured in her name with me as a named driver and she could drive it if she wanted ... pretty standard fare at the time I believe. ;-)

We do get the 'and who is the primary driver' question now but as I say to them at the time .... it's impossible to answer as we both drive either car depending on what suits best .

Cheers, T i m

p.s. The cheeky blighters just offered me a multi-bike renewal and casually dropped off the 'and can ride any bike not owned by you and with the owners permission (3rd party only)' bit. For about 20 quid more I went back with the previous underwriter who was able to offer such. As with our car insurances, you never know when such things might come in handy ...

On 26/04/2013 21:35, Nick Finnigan wrote:> On 26/04/2013 11:55, Andy Cap wrote: >> Why does simply adding a spouse to your insurance reduce the premium? > > Because that is the boring option, and not having a spouse who drives > your car makes you less predictable.

That would be my thinking, just like being married, having kids and a homeowner can reduce premiums.

I expect they look at the figures and see people who own houses/married/have partners/kids claim £nnnn less than those who dont.

I would like to think it is all done on the numbers.

I have often wondered how it is worked out and figure that a basic figure is started with and multipliers for thevarious risk factors are applied.

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)" writes

My company wanted to charge me for removing an (ex) girl friend from my insurance and replacing her with my daughter.

I said ok, just remove the ex, and they wanted the same amount for that!

They are not allowed to use the "numbers" anymore to set premium for young female drivers lower than young male drivers, even though the numbers prove they are lower risk.

Why should they be allowed to use the numbers to support other discrimination criteria?

Do they give cohabiting gays the same discounts as they do for opposite sex partners?

Basically they should have a rate for unproven drivers and then go on each individual drivers record.

and to encourage careful driving the no claims bonus system ought to increase every year without restriction so that the drivers that manage to avoid accidents the best will enjoy the very lowest premiums and strive to keep them. I know one old boy that has not made a claim in 65 years, yet still pays 600 a year.

Hell, yes, why should they be able to discriminate on the grounds of truth? Political correctness is *much* more important.

That seems to be 'guilty till proven innocent' though (ignoring the 'stats' etc), all tarred with the same brush?

I think at the worst they should / could hold a 'deposit' for the 'unproven' factor and then refund it if you complete the year with no issues?

I think the AA reported that something like 25% of all the 25 and under drivers had an accident so that still leaves the vast majority (of even the most risky category) who don't.

I'm guessing *someone* has to pay for the minority and I suppose I'm glad it's not me (so much) ...

Cheers, T i m

p.s. Our daughter (now 22) looked into getting one of the 'black boxes' fitted to her car but at the time, it wasn't likely to save much if at all. Since the EU gender rules have been in place it now might make more sense as the car is rarely used by either of them (she shares the car with her b/f) between 11pm and 5am and they are both sensible and responsible drivers.

When I lived in the US, the 6-monthly car insurance statement from Allstate had a breakdown of each part of the premium. Each policy had a code made up of letters/numbers representing various sections, such as where you lived, how many people covered, how may cars, length of no-claim periods, etc, and you could follow this and see how the premium was calculated. The downside of the US system was that No-Claims Discounts were rare, the US companies tended to start with the basic premium, and then add on as many extras as possible.

Nope - generally my wife or I get the same premium as the sole driver, and a lower premium when adding the other as a named driver. Obviously, adding a young and less boring driver increases the premium.

Adding my wife with her three claims (one her fault, two no fault) reduces my premium.

Sorry, I worded it badly when I said "I believe it's to do with 'shared use'. eg. If you ride / drive a vehicle singularly you might not be as careful as if others also have (need) use of it."

Shared use (with the same individual risk) reduces the premium. So, as long as the additional rider / driver doesn't 'increase' the risk, the premium is usually reduced.

Quite. ;-)

Cheers, T i m