When my 17 year-old son started learning to drive I shopped around and changed my car insurance to Quinn as they offered the best price. He is due to take his test in a couple of weeks, and a friend told me she was in the same position recently, and when her son passed and she phoned Quinn to inform them, they asked her for £600! I phoned Quinn to ask if this was correct, and they tell me they will definitely need an additional payment, but cannot tell me how much, or give any indication of this until he passes.I fully understand that that the risk increases when he drives alone, however I am at a loss as to why they cannot tell me how much I will have to pay (or even give an estimate based on him passing today). Should I have been told about this increase when I took out the policy? There is nothing on the paperwork or booklet they sent me. I have a couple of other friends who have taken out policies with quinn and are also unaware of this!

Hi oy you,

No, Quinn should not have made you aware of this as it is commonplace throughout the motor insurance market; ie. it's not an 'unusual or uncommon policy exclusion' - which is what they would need to give you more information on before incepting cover. If you asked the question, in specific, then the answer should have been "Yes, the premium is more than likely going to increase when the young driver obtains a full UK licence". Although it's probably not 'obvious' to everybody that the insurance would increase in this scenario, there is an element of common sense that goes with it. If a driver is left to his own devices after only shortly obtaining his full UK licence, he (especially) is going to be a higher risk to the insurer. A higher risk profile means an increased premium.

They probably cannot tell you how much because they don't want to give you an estimation now when the rates will change again next month, and it would also depend on how much time you have had on cover/cover remaining etc. When I dealt with this sort of thing, I refused to give an estimation on the basis that I didn't want Mrs. B saying "Well he told me it would only be about £300, not £650... this is outrageous, an utter sham, he should be fired, your company should be closed down and I'm going to scream and shout in the corner for 5 weeks whilst I draft a letter to the national press and my MP about it". I appreciate you are probably not like Mrs. B but there are LOTS of Mrs. B's about who say they understand one thing one minute, then fly off their handle when they haven't understood it and something goes off-course... blaming the insurance industry for the rest of their days living on planet Earth. Although an estimation is exactly that, some people base their actions on them. Whilst a complaint would never be upheld about this sort of thing (providing it was stated as an premium indictation only), it would still be 'bad press' for that company and embarassment for the agent.

There's that explanation, or the agent you spoke to simply couldn't be bothered to work it out - even in rough, and bearing in mind it's the simplest of mathematics once you know the premium and it's base when the risk is altered! Perhaps give them a call and see if you get somebody else to help?

I think Quinn should have made this specific knowledge to you at policy inception along with a likely premium change on passing a test (say within 6 months).As usual the insurers bend the rules to extract further premiums based on any change they can muster.£600 beggars belief.

I have to say I am not even convinced of the increased risk.Of course, the loony young driver(of which there are a few ) will taint it for all,but for the majority of sensible young drivers passing their test must be a milestone indicating greater competence than before.You haven't got mom or dad screaming in your ear and distracting you for one.......lol. There is likely to be some additional mileage to declare which will have some impact,and you will be asked for an estimate.

Sounds like Quinn have suckered you in.

I have to say I am not even convinced of the increased risk.Of course, the loony young driver(of which there are a few ) will taint it for all,but for the majority of sensible young drivers passing their test must be a milestone indicating greater competence than before.You haven't got mom or dad screaming in your ear and distracting you for one.......lol. There is likely to be some additional mileage to declare which will have some impact,and you will be asked for an estimate.

Sounds like Quinn have suckered you in.

For the point of clarification, to benefit the OP, I'll explain this one.

I appreciate the point about a level of competence reached as shown by passing a driving test. I also see the point RE: mum and dad not screaming in your ear. However, the experienced driver sitting with the provisional driver (who is learning to drive) takes over a large proportion of decision making and is going to spot potential hazards sooner than those with the lower experience. There are far fewer claims from those provisional drivers driving with the assistance of a qualified driver of X years, compared to those that have just passed their test leading up to the age of 21 & 25. When the inexperienced driver then drives on his/her own, they have full control of the car and must make decisions for themselves without guidance. With younger drivers, they will possibly have friends in the vehicle with them (a larger risk in itself, especially if they are also young), and may possibly be distracted by music, as one example. All of these factors are taken into consideration when setting a premium in this situation. It's worked for many years and the analysed data provides an accurate insight as to causes of such claims, how much they cost and which group this fits in with.

From an experienced perspective, younger drivers are bad moral hazards and are a major factor in claims payouts. This is well documented. The premium is higher than those with experience because the risk they pose to other people, and their property... not necessarily because the vehicle they are driving is only worth £50. That vehicle can cause more than £50 worth of damage. Younger drivers are more likely to be distracted by (illegally) changing a CD in the vehicle/altering the IPOD, or driving to impress another party, compared to a driver of, say, 30 who is automatically a good moral hazard based on experience.

From what I can gather, backfoot, you are also asking Quinn to inform customers that should one move from Norfolk 'NR' postode to East London 'E' postcode, your premium will increase? It's common sense to realise that should one move from an area where less claims occur, to an area when claims occur more frequently, that the premium will increase in-line with the risk posed.

OP (oy you), you haven't been suckered in, and I appreciate that you understand that the risk increases; I hope the answer to your query RE: estimation of increase has been satisfactory. As stated, see if you can speak to an alternative agent at Quinn who is prepared to work out the estimation. The good news is that the market is competitively priced and the chances of getting a reduced premium elsewhere are high.

Is it really true that when an accident occurs,the full detaills of all passengers,the music being played,the IPOD on is always recorded on the claim form?? The horror stories of the few,the problems with some young drivers,become anecdotal evidence,for our resident 'insurance representative',to quote at us.I think we are being blinded by fiction.

I personally don't take it all as gospel,far from it. I think that is a problem for a minority and statistically there may be a higher risk ,for young drivers,(you would expect it) but I certainly don't accept the degree it is painted by our 'doom merchant' and the industry currently exploiting this opportunity.

The issue about changing address is totally different from the provisional licence holder who is likely to become qualified.You know the more I read from you and look at the detail,the less it stands up to scrutiny.Of course on change of address there is a material change which the insurer would be unaware off.The latter is an expected event likely to happen within the policy period.

I do wish you would think a bit more, before being critical of other views, before you bombard us with your self rightous knowledge.

backfoot:

Is it really true that when an accident occurs,the full detaills of all passengers,the music being played,the IPOD on is always recorded on the claim form?? The horror stories of the few,the problems with some young drivers,become anecdotal evidence,for our resident 'insurance representative',to quote at us.I think we are being blinded by fiction.

I personally don't take it all as gospel,far from it. I think that is a problem for a minority and statistically there may be a higher risk ,for young drivers,(you would expect it) but I certainly don't accept the degree it is painted by our 'doom merchant' and the industry currently exploiting this opportunity.

The issue about changing address is totally different from the provisional licence holder who is likely to become qualified.You know the more I read from you and look at the detail,the less it stands up to scrutiny.Of course on change of address there is a material change which the insurer would be unaware off.The latter is an expected event likely to happen within the policy period.

I do wish you would think a bit more, before being critical of other views, before you bombard us with your self rightous knowledge.

<Rolls eyes>

Backfoot,

I replied to the OP whilst trying to ascertain your view on whether an insurer should mention that a change in area would lead to an increased premium. That's it. No need for your usual backfoot digs!

I really don't want to get into another pointless heated discussion with somebody who has a one way of thinking, and who is often very incorrect on insurance matters. It's also my wish that you would think a bit more before being critical of views - especially where these views are being expressed by somebody with experience in the topic being discussed, and where the answers are not questionable as they relate to fact.

What do you do for a living? If you have an occupation, would it not get irritating if somebody with absolutely no clue about the trade/job you do, starts ranting and raving about absolute rubbish to do with it? Where it was marginally irritating to start with, it's getting quite tiresome and boring now.

I'm giving factual answers to a question that's been asked by another member. My answers are reasons, some of many more, as to why the risk is higher and why the premium is increased. An actuary dealing with statistical data can very accurately tell you a projected figure for the amount of claims that will occur at any given time, by age group, area or otherwise. Their knowledge is so vast that they could give you an accurate estimation on where a claim is likely to happen next, who it will involve and how much it is going to cost. An underwriter assesses data that has been collaborated in order to produce a premium accordingly. I fail to see how you can argue with this? Why is this not Gospel? Where is the fiction?

The issue about changing addresses is not totally different at all. It relates to change of risk in area, whereas the driver going from provisional to full is a change of risk in the insured's policy. Both changes of risk(!) The change of address is a material change - very well done on that comment! Top marks! However, so is the change in driving status for any driver on a policy. The latter is not necessarily an expected event likely to occur within the policy period; the named driver could be on the policy to allow him/her to drive before he/she goes to university? There may be no plan for that person to be driving so that they could pass their test. I know plenty of drivers that are on a policy as a provisional driver so that they can get 'some' experience of driving but plan to take their test at a later date. In actual fact a friend of mine is just taking her first driving test at the end of this month after finishing a 5 years stint at university, but she has been a provisional driver since 2002. Not every provisional driver passes the driving test in any one insurance period. It's not unreasonable to suggest that every insurer makes a special provision to let the client know there may be an increase if there is a change of detail, but it's a little bit of a barmy suggestion RE provisional to full! It actually states on insurance documentation that the customer must make the insurer aware of any changes and to supply 'complete and accurate details at the inception of the policy, throughout the life of the policy, and at renewal as failure to do so will either increase the premium or invalidate your insurance cover'. Why can't the customer ask 'Can you tell me if there is a change in premium and give me an estimation of how much the premium will increase by after my named driver has passed his/her test?'? A fair few did when I dealt with this side of motor insurance!

Silly comments from this thread: "As usual the insurers bend the rules to extract further premiums based on any change they can muster", "£600 beggars belief", "I have to say I am not even convinced of the increased risk", "Sounds like Quinn have suckered you in", "Is it really true that when an accident occurs,the full detaills of all passengers,the music being played,the IPOD on is always recorded on the claim form??", "The horror stories of the few,the problems with some young drivers,become anecdotal evidence", "I think we are being blinded by fiction", "the industry currently exploiting this opportunity.", "The issue about changing address is totally different from the provisional licence holder who is likely to become qualified", "I do wish you would think a bit more, before being critical of other views".

Useful comments from this thread: "I think that is a problem for a minority and statistically there may be a higher risk ,for young drivers,(you would expect it)", "Of course on change of address there is a material change which the insurer would be unaware off"

I'm afraid to say, Backfoot, that your pessimistic views on Insurance (which often lead to bizarre, incorrect answers and solutions), the Gas industry, and probably even life itself only throws your 'doom merchant' comment back at you. I have never conversed with somebody as negative, ignorant, argumentative and belligerent, through a forum or otherwise. Your clouded and obvious narrow minded perception of subjects show throughout your posts which only lead to unproductive answers given to forum members requesting assistance in the first place, deviating from the issue at hand. This is a help forum, is it not? Your persistent personal jibes throughout the posts, aimed at myself, will only aid to diminishing judgment toward your 'sound' information. If you cannot see this now, and continue to post true to 'backfoot form', then one must consider who really is the self-righteous one (!)

Ignoring the silly diatribe about me,what this shows is how the insurance industry operates without regard to the genuine customer service issue relevant here.

The original poster,a genuine fair minded customer, enters into a contract in utmost good faith.They have limited knowledge of insurance,risk assessment,actuaries etc.They look for insurance for a provisional licence holder which ,by defintion,will already carry a high premium and genuinely think that is the end of it.

The likely and most probable event,is for the the person involved to pass their test in this insurance period.A situation which the insurers must see on a regular basis.Yet, for some extraordinary reason,the consequential effects for the insured are kept under wraps. Indeed many policyholders may not even realise that they would be obliged to reveal the change,probably allowing the insurer to weasel their way out of any claim.

This isn't rocket science,its about being a good customer focussed business but instead of accepting that there may be a good idea for change,we, (and me personally) are bombarded with insults for even daring to support someone who thinks a further £600 is plainly a rip off.Had the original poster known of this and the likely cost,then they may have further shopped around or made a totally different set of decisions.

Ref: backfoot post at Sat, May 17 2008 9:44 AM

LOL. Who is the one bombarding the other with insults? I've not insulted you for thinking a further £600 is a rip off, I've just stated that it was a silly comment to make. How can £600 be a rip off when it's their underwriting terms that set their premium only? How can it also be a rip off when this figure is likely to be reduced if the customer went elsewhere? "The consequential effects for the insured are kept under wraps"???? I mean, seriously, did you just write that? Do you have conspiracy theories behind a deep Government plan to rule the entire universe taking over all alien life forms? Just to illustrate your odd and negative theoretical attitude towards everything!

This is the fact. And it is end of story. The insured wishes to amend the details on their insurance policy. This alters the risk. The premium increases (in this instance). There are many changes that an insured can make that will alter the risk, which is why the insurer requests that they be kept up to date. Actuaries, risk assessments and knowlege of insurance, at this stage, are not especially required as common sense prevails. The OP (oy you) has already stated that he/she understands how the risk is increased, so what exactly are you questioning backfoot??

It's very much like driving around in circles with you, eventually leading to a very sturdy brick wall to which there is no way of getting past!

Conversely,the insured has little opportunity to shop around now they are tied into the contract.There will be cancellation charges. All the OP has questioned is whether the insurer had an obligation to let them know the likely outcome of this expected change.I happen to fully agree that it would be good customer service and best practice to do this.To land someone with a £600 bill,a huge amount,in these circumstances is totally unfair.

It may be Quinn's and other insurers current line.It would be wouldn't it?

What we are talking about is whether the process could be improved.i.e. the timing and disclosure of this important piece of information. The tone of the response above is very akin to those you get when talking to a call centre operative.This is our policy.....,this is how it works......etc. no wonder customers get frustrated.

If I were the OP I would want to escalate this.