I know this has been discussed before but........

[Jody]

................the cheapest he could find was 4000 pounds WITH a black box. This is a disgrace!1 Why do they penalise youngsters even before they have the chance to prove their driving skills ?

The statistics are around 1 in 5 new drivers have an accident in their first year. So that's £20K to cover both parties. Given that a light prang can be 2-4k repair job per car, it's not hard to see why they ask such a large amount to cover. Two cars written off can easily total £20k

I'm not saying it's right. It's just a numbers game

 

[T4tomo]

He has a Vauxhall Corsa worth no more than 2000 pounds.

Really need to know what insurance group - As a Corsa is a common car, they have a lot of accidents and unless its the lowest horsepower engine likely to be someway up the "group" scale. My lot learnt to drive and used as first car a 1L Picanto which is group 1 insurance. It might be worth trading it in for a cheap group 1 or 2 car for a couple of years to build up his NCD.

True, but there can still be a lower premium for adding a named driver.

This correct, I'm a named driver on all 3 kid's cars and on one my partners kids car, it makes a significant difference

Yeah usually a tenner less these days, if anything at all

no significant savings in the £100s.

also worth considering a multicar policy with your own car - get a discount off both premiums.

 

[Electric_Andy]

no significant savings in the £100s.

In your case maybe, but depends on a number of factors. My stepson added me to his quote and it actually increased by 14 quid. That's when I had 9 years no claims.

 

[welsh dragon]

New drivers and young drivers have more accidents than just about any other group of drivers that's why the insurance is so high. They have to prove they can drive and not have accidents before the insurance company lowers their risk.

In other words, they do stupid things, take risks, show off to their friends and yes I know not all new young drivers but the premiums set by insurance companies reflect the risk they take with different groups. It's a fact of life.

 

[Sharky]

One of my daughter's seems to be following a strategy. For many years, they survived with just one car, but my daughter wanted to become a bit more mobile herself and our grandson was a few years from getting a licence. So they bought a little fiat 500 as a second car. My grandson, now just 17, will be learning to drive in my daughters car as a named driver and I imagine, once he has passed his test will be "borrowing" my daughters car from time to time. Unlikely that my grandson will be buying a car in his own name for at least 5 years. He has the rest of his 6th form and then Uni to get through first.

 

[PK99]

The statistics are around 1 in 5 new drivers have an accident in their first year. So that's £20K to cover both parties. Given that a light prang can be 2-4k repair job per car, it's not hard to see why they ask such a large amount to cover. Two cars written off can easily total £20k

I'm not saying it's right. It's just a numbers game

But it is right and it is fair - that is how insurance works. The alternative is we all pay higher premiums and young drivers feel no pressure to be safer drivers

 

[ClichéGuevara]

One of my daughter's seems to be following a strategy. For many years, they survived with just one car, but my daughter wanted to become a bit more mobile herself and our grandson was a few years from getting a licence. So they bought a little fiat 500 as a second car. My grandson, now just 17, will be learning to drive in my daughters car as a named driver and I imagine, once he has passed his test will be "borrowing" my daughters car from time to time. Unlikely that my grandson will be buying a car in his own name for at least 5 years. He has the rest of his 6th form and then Uni to get through first.

For my daughter, I actually bought her a car before she'd passed her test, and she was listed as the owner and main driver. Obviously she needed to be accompanied, but the time counted towards her no claims and the insurance for her as a learner was much, much lower than for a first time driver with a full license.

It worked out far cheaper, and she was much more familiar with the car once she could drive alone.

 

[fossyant]

Costing me £1k to insure one of the cheapest cars out there, an Aygo, for son and daughter to be named drivers. Madness.

 

[Electric_Andy]

Costing me £1k to insure one of the cheapest cars out there, an Aygo, for son and daughter to be named drivers. Madness.

It is unfair yes; what should happen is new drivers would pay a more expensive but reasonable fee of 2x max of what an over 25yo would pay, and that should come down every year if they've had no claims, but would also rise if they made a claim.

What actually happens is that they assume all youngsters are going to drive like the reckless minority, so charge everyone £1000s before they've even had a chance to prove theirselves as sensible drivers.

Further to this, I know of people who have made claims and it has had no financial impact on their annual premium. Whereas last year I made my first claim in 25 years of driving and my premium instantly went up £200. The guidelines should be clear and transparent and act across all companies. I accept a price hike if I've made a claim and I was at fault. I don't accept that someone else in the same position with a different company does not have to pay anything more than they did last year (apart from increases caused by inflation).

 

[Jody]

But it is right and it is fair - that is how insurance works. The alternative is we all pay higher premiums and young drivers feel no pressure to be safer drivers

My point was to the OP that it doesn't seem fair (to him) that a new driver has to pay £4k per year to insure a car but that's just how it is given the cost of claims made.

 

[Mo1959]

Costing me £1k to insure one of the cheapest cars out there, an Aygo, for son and daughter to be named drivers. Madness.

Would you not be as well putting it in one of their names? At least they could start building up a no claim bonus.

 

[newfhouse]

It is unfair yes; what should happen is new drivers would pay a more expensive but reasonable fee of 2x max of what an over 25yo would pay, and that should come down every year if they've had no claims, but would also rise if they made a claim.

That would only work if new young drivers were no more than twice the risk, but I don’t think that matches the one-in-five statistic given earlier in the thread.

How can insurance companies work out who the 20% are before they have established any driving or insurance history?

If you, personally, had to cover the potential costs of repairing the damage caused by a random seventeen year old in a car how much would you want to charge? Bear in mind you could be liable for tens or hundreds of thousands of pounds, worst case.

 

[PK99]

That would only work if new young drivers were no more than twice the risk, but I don’t think that matches the one-in-five statistic given earlier in the thread.

How can insurance companies work out who the 20% are before they have established any driving or insurance history?

If you, personally, had to cover the potential costs of repairing the damage caused by a random seventeen year old in a car how much would you want to charge? Bear in mind you could be liable for tens or hundreds of thousands of pounds, worst case.

They don't. That's how insurance works - people are divided into broad classes and companies decide who is their target market - and load premiums accordingly.

It is not car repairs that is the issue - it is damage to people that drives the cost.

If there were a way of profitably providing cheap insurance to new drivers, someone would offer the product and laugh all the way to the bank - that is how markets work. The fact that there is no such product tells the story

 

[Electric_Andy]

how much would you want to charge?

I'd want to charge a lot less than £2-3k, given that I'm already making hundreds of thousands a year from all the other policies where I haven't had to pay out. A cap of £1200 (£100/month) would seem resonable to me. And that would be re-couped in later years if a driver then made an at-fault claim so had a higher premium. It's fair that they are priced out of insurance if they've already totalled someone's car, but to be priced out from the start is pre profiteering as they know parents and family might help towards the cost.

I just think under 25 year-olds have the very rough end of the stick before they've even made a claim, when you could argue that this age group are the poorest and often most transient, and the need for a car is greater as they haven't the luxury of a secure job, secure housing and secure transport schedules like the middle aged have.

 

[Jody]

given that I'm already making hundreds of thousands a year from all the other policies where I haven't had to pay out.

They aren't making hundreds of thousands from the policies that don't claim. It's those other policies pooled that provide the payout.