Mandatory comprehensive insurance for p platers in NSW? - Page 3

Fiesta_Man69 · 16-10-2012, 08:44 AM

It was with JC insurance... so no small company. Trouble was the other driver was on his ps with restricted passenger numbers - long story short his insurer wouldn't cover - so I had the choice of paying the excess and taking the ncb hit or pursuing the driver thru court to recover costs. (I didn't have a police report nor witness statements which hurt)

How many people on here read all pages of the PDS before signing up?

There's a reason third party property is so cheap compared to full comp....

FGII-XR6 · 16-10-2012, 09:00 AM

It seems some of you have no idea what different types of insurance cover.
CTP greenslip covers bodily injury to third parties only
Third party property damage covers damage to propery belonging to other people
Comprehensive insurance covers the same as third party property damage but also covers you own car, but it does not cover bodily injury
Saying I have comprehensive why should I pay for a green slip shows a complete lack of understanding of insurance. check what your different policies cover

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiesta_Man69

It was with JC insurance... so no small company. Trouble was the other driver was on his ps with restricted passenger numbers - long story short his insurer wouldn't cover - so I had the choice of paying the excess and taking the ncb hit or pursuing the driver thru court to recover costs. (I didn't have a police report nor witness statements which hurt)

How many people on here read all pages of the PDS before signing up?

There's a reason third party property is so cheap compared to full comp....

No police report? well you only have yourself to blame. if someone else is in the wrong with more the the most minor scrape always get the cops involved

tranquilized · 16-10-2012, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiesta_Man69

It was with JC insurance... so no small company. Trouble was the other driver was on his ps with restricted passenger numbers - long story short his insurer wouldn't cover - so I had the choice of paying the excess and taking the ncb hit or pursuing the driver thru court to recover costs. (I didn't have a police report nor witness statements which hurt)

How many people on here read all pages of the PDS before signing up?

There's a reason third party property is so cheap compared to full comp....

What difference would it have made had that guy had comprehensive insurance then? Or maybe he did, either way - the insurance company wouldn't cover it.

And see this is why I cant stand insurance companies, and find the idea of making it compulsory so abhorrent. They'll look for any excuse not to pay a claim out. They might find a legitimate reason, fine, but other times its not so legitmate. Imagine how many drivers are out there with paid up comprehensive insurance, who aren't actually covered. They'll take your money no questions asked, but make a claim - thats when they'll be asking all the questions.

Any legislation that increases the profits of these disgusting companies is a very bad idea. Maybe if it was a government run/regulated, not for profit insurance scheme, like the TAC third party levy in Victoria but extended to cover property- then compulsory insurance could be a good idea.

flappist · 16-10-2012, 11:24 AM

I would be in favour of compulsory insurance if a prerequisite was that for an insurance company to be elegible they must be prepared to insure public events at and reasonable low premium.

Of course this would also require NZ type legislation similar to "If you jump off a bungy while off your tree on drugs and then vomit on your new trendy shoes causing you to slip over and hit your head on a rock you can't sue the entire world because IT IS YOUR FAULT IDIOT".

sd1800 · 16-10-2012, 11:30 AM

I always considered it part of my responsibility as a road user to have at least 3rd party property. My first car was written off by an red p plater 18year old driving his mums 5 year old Pulsar. Neither of them had insurance other than a greenslip or had any money. He wrote his mums car off too....

Luckily for me, my 3rd party property policy also paid me up to $3k if i was hit by an uninsured driver but if this wasn't the case i'd be up **** creek!

Fiesta_Man69 · 16-10-2012, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by au3xr6

No police report? well you only have yourself to blame. if someone else is in the wrong with more the the most minor scrape always get the cops involved

So if someone backed into you in a carpark and caused minor damage you would call the cops? Can't imagine what their response might be...

flappist · 16-10-2012, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiesta_Man69

So if someone backed into you in a carpark and caused minor damage you would call the cops? Can't imagine what their response might be...

I do not know about NSW but in QLD if the combined damage bill is greater than $6k or anyone is hurt then calling the Police is mandatory.
Just repainting the side of a car and a little panel work can easily be more than $3k.

FGII-XR6 · 16-10-2012, 11:56 AM

You clearly said it cost 2K excess so the damage was by no means minor. significant damage = call the cops the other driver has no choice in the matter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiesta_Man69

So if someone backed into you in a carpark and caused minor damage you would call the cops? Can't imagine what their response might be...

BENT_8 · 16-10-2012, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

I do not know about NSW but in QLD if the combined damage bill is greater than $6k or anyone is hurt then calling the Police is mandatory.
Just repainting the side of a car and a little panel work can easily be more than $3k.

$1500 per panel is what we were advised recently.

Some idiot pulled out from a roadside carpark and side swiped my wifes AU.
The police didnt attend as there were no bodily injuries, but they said a report number is essential for anything over $3k, and that as 2 panels, the left rear door and dogleg, were damaged it would exceed the $3k.
She took the car to the local station and they made a report with all the other drivers details.
Car was repaired within 10 days.

Definately a need for 3rd party property, if not full comp, no question.
Had full comp for 15yrs, rating 1, only had one at fault accident with no other party involved, the other half a dozen claims were not at fault.

xisled · 16-10-2012, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiesta_Man69

It was with JC insurance... so no small company. Trouble was the other driver was on his ps with restricted passenger numbers - long story short his insurer wouldn't cover - so I had the choice of paying the excess and taking the ncb hit or pursuing the driver thru court to recover costs. (I didn't have a police report nor witness statements which hurt)

How many people on here read all pages of the PDS before signing up?

There's a reason third party property is so cheap compared to full comp....

Not sure what happened in your case, but if you are not at fault for an accident, have full comp and you give the other person details, name address, rego you would be covered and not have to pay excess.

It states that in JC PDS. Also been with JCI for a few years and have never had to pay an excess when I am not at fault.

Rodp · 16-10-2012, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiesta_Man69

So if someone backed into you in a carpark and caused minor damage you would call the cops? Can't imagine what their response might be...

There's nothing stopping you from going down to the nearest cop shop and filing a police report - there's no need for them to attend in that circumstance.

xisled · 16-10-2012, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tranquilized

What difference would it have made had that guy had comprehensive insurance then? Or maybe he did, either way - the insurance company wouldn't cover it.

And see this is why I cant stand insurance companies, and find the idea of making it compulsory so abhorrent. They'll look for any excuse not to pay a claim out. They might find a legitimate reason, fine, but other times its not so legitmate. Imagine how many drivers are out there with paid up comprehensive insurance, who aren't actually covered. They'll take your money no questions asked, but make a claim - thats when they'll be asking all the questions.

Any legislation that increases the profits of these disgusting companies is a very bad idea. Maybe if it was a government run/regulated, not for profit insurance scheme, like the TAC third party levy in Victoria but extended to cover property- then compulsory insurance could be a good idea.

I love when people have the above opinion on insurance companies. Insurance companies are not in the business of not paying out claims. If they did they would go broke because no one would insure with them. Most insurance company have a 98% to 99% of paying out claims.

IMO the reason people say this, is they hear 1 bad story from a friend relative etc. and from then on, insurance companies are bad.

It actual cost the insurance company more to not payout a claim, than pay it out.

Also about the police report thing.
Insurance company does not need a police report for a car accident. In Victoria you only have to get a police report if someone is hurt. When I worked in claims, it would take up to 8 weeks to get the report. In most cases we had already settled the claim by the time the report came through.

1 thing to remember police are criminal and insurance are civil, so even if the police reports says 1 thing, it may not always be the way the insurance company goes.

mytgxl · 16-10-2012, 01:54 PM

You said that you didn`t want to make this a p plater bashing affair! why did you mention them then! All people should have atleast have 3rd party property,To cover the other driver,I`m more worried about the ones that don`t have insurance at all! Wether they be p plater or not!

eyes87 · 16-10-2012, 02:04 PM

Third party property I believe should be compulsory but not full comprehensive.
For example. My first car cost me $350. Full comprehensive insurance on it was going to be something like $480 a year. So no I didnt get it. Why would? I have always had a minimum of third party property on all my cars though.

flightstrike · 16-10-2012, 02:32 PM

If you cannot afford to cover yourself... you shouldn't be driving.

aussie muscle · 16-10-2012, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fairlane

I personally have never had a car without the minimum of third party property. My theory is what would happen if I ran into a Bentley.

My parents made me do this as requirement of getting a car. even when i was unemployed i kept at least 3ppd. Now that my car is financed, i needed full comp, but i'm keeping it going while i'm working full time. As for running into an expensive car, you could end up like 'future marty' in Back to the Future 2 (crashed into a rolls royce)

Hell Cat · 16-10-2012, 03:03 PM

Everyone should have full third party insurance- minimum, no matter what they drive or how old.

I got my 9month old car written off last year by a 50yr old guy who had no insurance (rear ended me)
He had no money, lucky I had insurance though.

Can't afford insurance, don't drive.

2011G6E · 16-10-2012, 03:21 PM

A friend of mine used to work at Suncorp, and said that discussions were always going on about compulsory third party. There had even been a query about whether insurance companies could do it like "normal" insurance...assess each driver as the apply and give them a premium to suit, instead of one premium across everyone. Most people would pay less, but some would face pretty steep premiums.
This would "discriminate against not-so-good drivers" was always the answer from government.

To which I say 'So what?"

No reason full comprehensive covering you for ten or twenty million bucks damage couldn't be changed to also include injuries to the other person as well as their vehicle, and then you could sign a stat dec and have the compulsory third party dropped off your rego...

xisled · 16-10-2012, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiesta_Man69

Lol. Wait til you get hit by a moron with third party property: read sweet fa insurance.

Then you find out about all the fine print in their insurance.

Third party property, at least from some big name companies, doesn't covet squat.

I wish I was wrong - I'd be $5K better off at least.

Like i've said before, the real test of insurance is when claims need to be settled.

Insurance PDS does not have fine print. I have read many PDS and not one has fine print. All the terms and conditions are in the same size font and not hidden.

Franco Cozzo · 16-10-2012, 05:59 PM

Third party insurance should be mandatory, so if you accidentally hit someones new BMW you aren't going to be a homeless bankrupt for the rest of your life, and the person with the BMW doesn't have to put up with getting $10 a week for the next 2500 years.

When I totalled my car, both of us in the accident were P platers and we both had full comprehensive insurance.

falconnut · 16-10-2012, 10:37 PM

Yikes.

well i drove about 3 years on 3rd party and never had a accident, i guess i was very lucky.

When i got the car in my sig i finally coughed up for compo last december and havent regretted it since.

i can understand why alot of fellow p platers only have 3rd party

or no insurance at all

as $300 or less a year is alot less expensive than $900+ for compo

I only got my fulls last month but fellow p player bro's i really recommend you get compo IF you can afford it, gives me peace of mind.

Yellow_Festiva · 17-10-2012, 09:42 AM

Only problem is.... the issuers of CTP are laughing all the way to the bank... Funny that it has gone up by double digits each year for the past 5 or so years, yet I remember reading somewhere that some miniscule amount (less than 5%???) of that money goes towards claims...... profit margins must be massive.

It's compulsory, so you MUST buy it... which is why when you do a cross company quote there is often a variance of only $5-30...

So... if full insurance was made compulsory, prices WILL go up just like CTP.

I was in favour of this earlier in the thread, now I'm not so sure it is a good idea... I always have full comp if it is a car of value and 3rd party property for my $2000 shopping / run about car.

Landau Stable · 17-10-2012, 10:01 AM

The trouble with comprehensive insurance for P platers is that they are the people who need it most, but being young are the people who can afford it the least. If it was made compulsory, there would be a lot less of them on the roads. In some cases that would be great, but the reality is that you'd get older drivers with no experience once they can afford their insurance, and also genuinely decent young drivers forced out of their cars as well. A reasonably priced 3rd party property damage price would be welcome, and would be happy to see it enforced rather than comprehensive, though it will sadly follow that of green slips, where these companies now know that you have no choice and will charge whatever they like. It would need to be more regulated to prevent this.