Insurance Rates for young people

OK, related to my Toyota ECHO thread, I priced myself out for insurance, and it said I would write the car off completely two times every year. Why do the companies do this bullE36M3 to young people around 25?

statistics.

easily beatable by purchasing a dead 80's pickup as your "primary" vehicle. Then you get multi-car discounts.
not that I did that as a kid or anything per a certain insurance agent.

Because they can.

Grtechguy wrote: statistics. easily beatable by purchasing a dead 80's pickup as your "primary" vehicle. Then you get multi-car discounts. not that I did that as a kid or anything per a certain insurance agent.

Or a Volvo. My dad found that out in the 80s

Mine was a cab of a 63 GMC. Neighbor sold us the title.

Grtechguy wrote: Mine was a cab of a 63 GMC. Neighbor sold us the title.

Good idea. I should get a taillight of a 92 Ford Ranger, and call that my primary vehicle.

Thanks for reminding me that i need to scream at my agent for setting up the MSM that gets driven maybe 6 months out of the year and only for pleasure as my primary year-round vehicle.

So far, the highest quote I've managed to get was $7k a year. I passed on a really good deal as result of that. I understand why they don't want my business in some cases, but it pisses me off anyway.

Every time I price it out online, with a 99 Miata as the only car, it comes out to ~$1000 a year for a 22 year old with a clean record.

mtn wrote: Every time I price it out online, with a 99 Miata as the only car, it comes out to ~$1000 a year for a 22 year old with a clean record.

They're getting me for $2700 a year. This is 2 drivers 4 cars though. However, both have a clean record, no points on licenses, no accidents.

I'm reasonably sure they've got the MSM as a primary vehicle like the idiots they are.

I find it hard to believe that a Cherokee and MX6 as primary drivers would jack it up that high.

In similar, a former co-worker's daughter was becoming of driving age. Since they owned two cars and would have 3 drivers, the insurance companies were going to insure the daughter on the highest of the two cars. His driveway contained a Porsche 944s and a BMW 535i.
The prices were outrageous.
For $200 he bought a non running Ford Tempo and bought plates for it. Now 3 cars for 3 drivers and this did not exclude the daughter from driving the other two. The price drop was dramatic and that Tempo never did run during his "ownership" but it got fresh plates every year.

snap_understeer wrote: OK, related to my Toyota ECHO thread, I priced myself out for insurance, and it said I would write the car off completely two times every year. Why do the companies do this bullE36M3 to young people around 25?

It's not bullE36 M3. It's all factual based. Young people statistically have a much higher incident rate...and with smart phones, etc...it's going even higher. Look at it from the insurance company side, and the risks they're taking. Let's say they collect $2000 from you for the year. But let's then say that you (and I'm not picking on you...substitute a 19 year old playing race boy) cause a terrible accident and nearly kill someone. The insurance company is now looking at paying $25k in damages to cars, and $20k, $50k, $100k+ (what are your policy limits??) in an injury claim. You gave them $2k, they paid out $75k. A losing proposition.

If you have a second car and are going to use it, then sure, get the multi car discount. But I'd strongly suggest staying away from pretending you do just to get the discount. You may get away with it, but if you get caught, you could wind up in a sticky spot you wish you never were.

Yes, I work in auto insurance claims, and spent a number of years as a fraud investigator.

Mine is $682 every six months on my Civic with one accident.

Klayfish wrote:

snap_understeer wrote: OK, related to my Toyota ECHO thread, I priced myself out for insurance, and it said I would write the car off completely two times every year. Why do the companies do this bullE36M3 to young people around 25?

It's not bullE36 M3. It's all factual based. Young people statistically have a much higher incident rate...and with smart phones, etc...it's going even higher. Look at it from the insurance company side, and the risks they're taking. Let's say they collect $2000 from you for the year. But let's then say that you (and I'm not picking on you...substitute a 19 year old playing race boy) cause a terrible accident and nearly kill someone. The insurance company is now looking at paying $25k in damages to cars, and $20k, $50k, $100k+ (what are your policy limits??) in an injury claim. You gave them $2k, they paid out $75k. A losing proposition. If you have a second car and are going to use it, then sure, get the multi car discount. But I'd strongly suggest staying away from pretending you do just to get the discount. You may get away with it, but if you get caught, you could wind up in a sticky spot you wish you never were. Yes, I work in auto insurance claims, and spent a number of years as a fraud investigator.

On the flip side, is there any recourse i could have if i can prove they've had the Miata as a primary driver when i specifically told them it would be "for pleasure only?" That would be fraud as well, yes?

Even with a multi car discount dont you pay even more because your insuring 2 cars? The discounts arent that deep from what I've seen.

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: On the flip side, is there any recourse i could have if i can prove they've had the Miata as a primary driver when i specifically told them it would be "for pleasure only?" That would be fraud as well, yes?

Im kind of wondering the same thing. Flo did away with her odometer discount, so they aren't tracking my miles any more. I dont think it netted me any discount because I put like 30k a year on my commuter.

This thread has me thinking about switching my "primary" to my old MPV and my 3 year old Accent to "pleasure". I dont think its fraud because I do find it pleasing to drive.

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: On the flip side, is there any recourse i could have if i can prove they've had the Miata as a primary driver when i specifically told them it would be "for pleasure only?" That would be fraud as well, yes?

If you could prove that you told your agent that the Miata was a pleasure only vehicle and you had another car on the policy that was the primary, and they got it backwards, you may be able to recover the extra premium. Usually when you take out a policy, you sign paperwork and it will ask about each vehicle's use. So if you can show they catagorized it incorrectly, you may have some recourse. But "fraud" is a whole different animal.

Insurance companies can't just do whatever they want, as many people think. At least in the auto insurance world, the reality is that we're so heavily regulated by the state I'm waiting for the day when I need their permission to sneeze at my desk. The state can levy some amazingly large fines and penalties for what they deem a violation.

Klayfish wrote:

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: On the flip side, is there any recourse i could have if i can prove they've had the Miata as a primary driver when i specifically told them it would be "for pleasure only?" That would be fraud as well, yes?

If you could prove that you told your agent that the Miata was a pleasure only vehicle and you had another car on the policy that was the primary, and they got it backwards, you may be able to recover the extra premium. Usually when you take out a policy, you sign paperwork and it will ask about each vehicle's use. So if you can show they catagorized it incorrectly, you may have some recourse. But "fraud" is a whole different animal. Insurance companies can't just do whatever they want, as many people think. At least in the auto insurance world, the reality is that we're so heavily regulated by the state I'm waiting for the day when I need their permission to sneeze at my desk. The state can levy some amazingly large fines and penalties for what they deem a violation.

Ok, so i need to produce the original paperwork. I thought it might have been just how much it costs us... but when EVERY quote i get from EVERY site otherwise undercuts what we're currently paying by $1000-$1200 a year, i'm pretty sure either 1) something is up, or 2) they REALLY don't care about keeping business.

And yep... Cherokee and MX6 are primary, Escort and Miata should be insured as "pleasure."

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:

Klayfish wrote:

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: On the flip side, is there any recourse i could have if i can prove they've had the Miata as a primary driver when i specifically told them it would be "for pleasure only?" That would be fraud as well, yes?

If you could prove that you told your agent that the Miata was a pleasure only vehicle and you had another car on the policy that was the primary, and they got it backwards, you may be able to recover the extra premium. Usually when you take out a policy, you sign paperwork and it will ask about each vehicle's use. So if you can show they catagorized it incorrectly, you may have some recourse. But "fraud" is a whole different animal. Insurance companies can't just do whatever they want, as many people think. At least in the auto insurance world, the reality is that we're so heavily regulated by the state I'm waiting for the day when I need their permission to sneeze at my desk. The state can levy some amazingly large fines and penalties for what they deem a violation.

Ok, so i need to produce the original paperwork. I thought it might have been just how much it costs us... but when EVERY quote i get from EVERY site otherwise undercuts what we're currently paying by $1000-$1200 a year, i'm pretty sure either 1) something is up, or 2) they REALLY don't care about keeping business. And yep... Cherokee and MX6 are primary, Escort and Miata should be insured as "pleasure."

Might want to play around with the numbers some. I have a feeling the Escort would be lower than either the MX6 or the Cherokee.

mtn wrote:

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:

Klayfish wrote:

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: On the flip side, is there any recourse i could have if i can prove they've had the Miata as a primary driver when i specifically told them it would be "for pleasure only?" That would be fraud as well, yes?

If you could prove that you told your agent that the Miata was a pleasure only vehicle and you had another car on the policy that was the primary, and they got it backwards, you may be able to recover the extra premium. Usually when you take out a policy, you sign paperwork and it will ask about each vehicle's use. So if you can show they catagorized it incorrectly, you may have some recourse. But "fraud" is a whole different animal. Insurance companies can't just do whatever they want, as many people think. At least in the auto insurance world, the reality is that we're so heavily regulated by the state I'm waiting for the day when I need their permission to sneeze at my desk. The state can levy some amazingly large fines and penalties for what they deem a violation.

Ok, so i need to produce the original paperwork. I thought it might have been just how much it costs us... but when EVERY quote i get from EVERY site otherwise undercuts what we're currently paying by $1000-$1200 a year, i'm pretty sure either 1) something is up, or 2) they REALLY don't care about keeping business. And yep... Cherokee and MX6 are primary, Escort and Miata should be insured as "pleasure."

Might want to play around with the numbers some. I have a feeling the Escort would be lower than either the MX6 or the Cherokee.

Maybe, but i'm not trying to screw them, either. The Cherokee gets driven 7 days a week, 365 days a year. The Escort might be driven 30 days a year when it hits the road again for the first time in over a year. (Maybe i should have just taken it OFF the insurance while it was being built, huh?)

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: Ok, so i need to produce the original paperwork. I thought it might have been just how much it costs us... but when EVERY quote i get from EVERY site otherwise undercuts what we're currently paying by $1000-$1200 a year, i'm pretty sure either 1) something is up, or 2) they REALLY don't care about keeping business. And yep... Cherokee and MX6 are primary, Escort and Miata should be insured as "pleasure."

As long as the state approves, insurance companies are allowed to set rates individually. That allows companies to compete with each other. So each underwriter will look at an application and set the rates based on their companies guidelines. Some companies may deem a certain person or a certain car a higher risk than another company would. Hence why shopping around is good.

Klayfish wrote: You gave them $2k, they paid out $75k. A losing proposition.

Not when 10's of millions of young adults are forced to carry their product. You're not doing a very good job at pulling my heart strings for those poor off insurance companies

Ask your agent what is the lowest insurance rated car for your age bracket. Then buy a blown up, rusted out hulk of the same car. Insure it as your primary. Profit.

Appleseed wrote: Ask your agent what is the lowest insurance rated car for your age bracket. Then buy a blown up, rusted out hulk of the same car. Insure it as your primary. Lose less.

Fixed.

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: The Escort might be driven 30 days a year when it hits the road again for the first time in over a year. (Maybe i should have just taken it OFF the insurance while it was being built, huh?)

I am pretty sure you can just insure a car as being garage kept, not used. I dont know what the exact terminology is.

My friend's auto insurance is cheaper having his DD and project mustang insured (garaged, been off the road and not registered for years) than if he only had his DD covered, he just had to tell them it was garaged.

Not sure how that works if a car is just rotting in your driveway or backyard however. Just tell them its garaged but not drivable..