'Comedic' renewal pricing - Churchill

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

sgregory124

MB Enthusiast
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Messages
1,206
Location
Derbyshire
Car
E63S
Just had the renewal through for my C63S from Churchill this morning - frankly its worthy of an Oscar for comedy.

My premium has gone up a full £202 to £808 for the year.....thats for a 46 year old, 12,000 miles a year, car parked on the drive, with a £900 combined excess and 1 additional driver. No convictions and no claims etc etc... Also, we have another car insured with them, so I feel they are really taking the Micheal here....

Is it just me or have prices risen at a mad rate this year? Worse still, a quick check on compare the market shows that Churchill are the cheapest anyway at £770 for 'new' customers!

*Sigh* Yet another waste of my time whilst I threaten to leave them and they offer me a few crumbs/quid off and spin me the old 'prices have risen across the board' etc etc....
 
Many reports of premiums increasing, doubling in some cases.
 
My premium would have been going down if I was keeping the car (based on today's prices). It will be going down anyway as BMWs are cheaper to insure than Mercs apparently. So either way I'm winning this year :)
 
Just renewed mine on the S63 and, thanks to my broker (A Plan), it's reduced by around a tenner. :)

The original insurance company were trying to raise it by over 20% but prior to contacting me with a renewal notice the broker came up with an alternative.

Still not cheap at £749 but apart from a couple of non familiar names which popped up on the comparison sites it's about the best I can do. I also know that my broker can be very helpful in times of need, as I found out with a windscreen claim a few years ago, so it's worth my staying with them for that reason alone.

Unfortunately A Plan were out by a country mile on the other car (American Classic) wanting over £380 whereas I'm used to paying well under £200. :D
 
All our insurance renewals have increased by 25% - 30% with no changes to our circumstances , even the dog and house insurance.

Absolute greed from the providers , bit like the fuel pricing fiasco - one provider puts prices and the rest jump on the bandwagon with the same feeble excuses.

Not only should the supermarkets / fuel companies / utilities companies / financial institutions should be properly investigated for blatant profiteering the insurance companies should also be part of this.

No point fining a behemoth like Asda £60k for their part in ramping up fuel prices unnecessarily as it is a drop in the ocean for them , the person(s) within the company that instigated this "scam" should be held individually accountable for this , then any future "scammers" may think twice about doing the same as they would be unable to hide behind the corporate banner.

Morning rant over.

K
 
I've never understood the logic and thought process behind insurance premiums (if, indeed, there is one - I saw reported somewhere that someone found his car quote was less if he declared his vehicle as parked on the road than if it was parked on his driveway).
However, as a great many of us are now doing less miles per year due to changed working practices, surely the risk to insurance companies is reduced to a certain degree?
 
I've never understood the logic and thought process behind insurance premiums (if, indeed, there is one - I saw reported somewhere that someone found his car quote was less if he declared his vehicle as parked on the road than if it was parked on his driveway).
However, as a great many of us are now doing less miles per year due to changed working practices, surely the risk to insurance companies is reduced to a certain degree?
Interestingly as an experiment I removed my wife from the quote (held a UK license for half the time I have, no claims etc) and the price went UP by £60…..absolute joke.
 
Interestingly as an experiment I removed my wife from the quote (held a UK license for half the time I have, no claims etc) and the price went UP by £60…..absolute joke.
Nope, she reduces the risk on the policy.

Everyone should get a spare female, if they don’t have a wife available.

Just as for new drivers: if you include an experienced driver on the policy, regardless of whether they actually drive, the quote will “usually” go down.
 
This is normal insurance pricing. They discount to catch your business, then revert once you’re a repeat customer.

It’s nothing to do with this year, Putin, energy or greedflation.

If you negotiate or move, you can reduce the premium.

All explained in this insurance industry note:

https://www.contactengine.com/media...nce_market_contactengine_whitepaper_wp011.pdf
Yeah I get that, but it’s frustrating that I have to spend my time doing it - almost like I have nothing better to do…
 
Apparently!. The galling thing is now we have a second car again, the C63 only goes out on high days and holidays, so frustrating.

Can't you find a specialist insurer with a limited mileage? That might help the cost.

Nope, she reduces the risk on the policy.

Everyone should get a spare female, if they don’t have a wife available.

Just as for new drivers: if you include an experienced driver on the policy, regardless of whether they actually drive, the quote will “usually” go down.

Yes, because she has been judged a lower risk, so with her on the policy the expectation is she will be driving the car sometimes so the overall risk is lowered.

Conversely adding my partner to my policy increases the cost, because she was recently run into by a drunk driver at 40mph and had her car written off.
 
Conversely adding my partner to my policy increases the cost, because she was recently run into by a drunk driver at 40mph and had her car written off.
And this is the perverse way the insurance industry works - your partner was involved in something that wasn’t their fault and they get penalised. This has also happened to me when I was hit by an uninsured driver years ago….
 
And this is the perverse way the insurance industry works - your partner was involved in something that wasn’t their fault and they get penalised. This has also happened to me when I was hit by an uninsured driver years ago….

It's how risk calculations work - in maths if something has happened once the probability of it happening again increases. Not saying it's how they should do it, it just is.
 
And this is the perverse way the insurance industry works - your partner was involved in something that wasn’t their fault and they get penalised. This has also happened to me when I was hit by an uninsured driver years ago….

Insurers are like bookies, they calculate risk and probabilities. The risk is statistical and based (among other things) on past correlations. It is not limited to 'fault'. Ultimately, a careful driver will have fewer accidents, both at-fault and no-fault, and fewer claims. It's not about whether it's morally right or wrong, it is just statistics.

As an example, a careful driver will not enter a junction before checking that it is safe to do so, even if they have 'right of way', while a less experienced driver might sail through the junction, and end-up getting involved in a collision with another vehicle in what is a no-fault accident. Or, a careful driver will always plan ahead and stop slowly and early giving the drivers behind them ample to time to stop, while another driver will brake at the last minute thus getting involved in a no-fault accident when the car behind them crashes into theirs. Or, a careful driver will not park the car in a place where it might get hit (e.g. where lorries or vans turn etc), while another driver will, leading to a no-fault hit-and-run claim. Etc etc.

Insurers, like bookies, know how to calculate risk and probabilities, or they would long be out of business... and I guarantee you that a careful driver will - statistically - have overall fewer claims than a careless driver, both at-fault and no-fault. This is why all incidents and claims work against the insured (to varying degrees), whether at-fault or no-fault.
 
It's how risk calculations work - in maths if something has happened once the probability of it happening again increases. Not saying it's how they should do it, it just is.
I don’t agree, I was hit 20 years ago by that uninsured driver, doesn’t mean it’s going to happen again….there’s no logic behind that.
 
Conversely adding my partner to my policy increases the cost, because she was recently run into by a drunk driver at 40mph and had her car written off.
Find another woman, and she’ll decrease your premium.

Tell your wife that the French do this kind of thing all the time.
 
Yeah I get that, but it’s frustrating that I have to spend my time doing it - almost like I have nothing better to do…
15 minutes to save £150 by telling the insurer that you’re moving policy unless they match that (imaginary) quote.

They gave you a discount to win your business last year. Would it have been better if they hadn’t?
 
15 minutes to save £150 by telling the insurer that you’re moving policy unless they match that (imaginary) quote.
£150 - if only! Last time I spoke to Churchill when trying to get a better price for our second car, I was told in no uncertain terms that the price I saw on a comparison site was the best I would get and they wouldn’t be doing anything else for me, so forgive me for not sharing your optimism 😁
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom