Mandatory comprehensive insurance for p platers in NSW? - Page 2

JC · 15-10-2012, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FPV+fteT3

I own 3 cars 2 have full comprehensive insurance and the mighty excel has 3rd party property only. If I bend an Aston in the excel the Aston is covered and the excel is on the way to simms and with the money I saved on comprehensive insurance over the last five years I can buy another pair of excels and ram some more high end luxury cars whose owners tick me off cause I have insurance.....

LOL.

I believe 3rd party property should be mandatory along with rego and 3rd party personal. However, that won't stop people from driving unregistered and therefore uninsured, but it will minimise the occurrences of having to wait to get a car fixed because the other party is at fault and is uninsured (unless you have full comp, and then it doesn't matter).

MrEL · 15-10-2012, 03:20 PM

Third party property should be a must have.
If you cant afford it you cant afford a car simple.
With the new financial write off laws in NSW my 4x4 is back on 3rd party fire and theft.
My reasoning is I have spent way too much money on it for ANY insurance company to cover it properly. Its all engineered and legal which wasnt easy or cheap.
If it gets deemed a financial write off due to what the insurance company reckons its worth its declared a stat write off and it is dead and off the road under full comp.
If I have a at fault prang with 3rd party fire and theft that Im at fault with , the car I hit gets fixed so the owner doesnt get screwed and I keep my vehicle without it being listed on any databases so it can be fixed and put back on the road. If it takes 6 months sitting out the back under a tarp until I have time and cash to fix it so be it. At least I still have it.
If it gets stolen under either 3rd party fire and theft or full comp I have lost out big time either way so it doesnt bother me. If someone went to the effort to get around the killswitches , alarms and GPS tracker in it lets face it the 4x4 isnt coming back in one piece and if I get lucky they might find a bare chassis dumped in the bush somewhere.

**Sorted** · 15-10-2012, 03:20 PM

If all cars on the road had Compulsary Third Party Property Damage Insurance (not Personal injury - Property Damage) then motor insurance would be cheaper for all of us.

I wish :(

TheSneakiness · 15-10-2012, 03:29 PM

For me it would depend on if it the car was my lifeline would I get full comphrensive. Everything is about circumstances and what can ultimately help you out when you have an incident in your vehicle.

Just wish you could be insured against mechanical issues :(

**DJM83** · 15-10-2012, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by leighm

As if, insurance is a choice. If a driver hits you and you are insured, your insurance will fix it and go after the at fault for costs by way of the courts, though you will probably have to pay the excess which sucks. If a driver hits you and they have 3rd party insurance, again your car gets fixed with no cost to you. Why does everybody need to have full comp? What difference does it make if they have full or 3rd party to the one they hit?

When I was younger I went with 3rd party because it was so much cheaper when I was insuring a car that was worth a couple of grand.

So what people who are arguing for this are saying is this: you have a $2000 car and I expect that you spend $2000 to get full comp insurance so that you can get yours and my car fixed if you run into me. Really?

Whilst you do have a point, if it were made mandatory hopefully (longshot i know) insurance co's could make the pricing realistic for cars worth not so much. I think it should be mandatory, but they way they charge these days it is unrealistic for cars not worth much.

flappist · 15-10-2012, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJM83

Whilst you do have a point, if it were made mandatory hopefully (longshot i know) insurance co's could make the pricing realistic for cars worth not so much. I think it should be mandatory, but they way they charge these days it is unrealistic for cars not worth much.

Ah yes but the problem is that these cars that are not worth much still cost a fortune to fix and are therefore going to be written off more often than not even for a slight dent.

So your worn out 500,000km E series or VL worth maybe $3k needs a new engine, transmission, tyres and whatever else so you just sideswipe some other idiots similar junkheap in a parking lot at 20 km/h.

The paint would be more than $3k each so they both get their $3k to buy another worn out mess with a slightly less stuffed engine or whatever.

Meanwhile everyone else's premiums go up to cover this fraud......

**DJM83** · 15-10-2012, 04:12 PM

Hhhmmm never thought of that, maybe its not so realistic then.

XB GS 351 Coupe · 15-10-2012, 04:18 PM

Well if third party property was mandatory, which it should be comprehensive insurance would not be needed in most cases.

Full comprehensive insurance should definitely not be mandatory for anyone, as it is up the the vehicles owner to decide if they want their car covered or not. My main expensive vehicles have full comprehensive as I want to be covered when that drunk houso his unregistered VN runs into me.

I still have a run around that only has third party property, so I am covered should I run into someone, but it's not worth enough to warrant the cost of full insurance.

fat4D · 15-10-2012, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

For the same reason that cars older than about 10 or 15 years shouldn't be banned from the roads for normal daily use.

Yes it is sensible.
Yes it would improve most situations.

But it would set off the screaming minority about how they "can't afford/should have the choice/don't need/prefer not to" as always happens.

Really... So every au should not be on the road while I see the occasional one that's in bad condition but 10 years is nothing for a car.

As a younger person who didn't have insurance for the first couple of years purely because instance companies slog young people to A point it's not affordable. I had a car worth 3000 and they wanted 900 a year for third party property.

flappist · 15-10-2012, 04:22 PM

What was the last line of my quote again?

leighm · 15-10-2012, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJM83

Whilst you do have a point, if it were made mandatory hopefully (longshot i know) insurance co's could make the pricing realistic for cars worth not so much. I think it should be mandatory, but they way they charge these days it is unrealistic for cars not worth much.

Insurance premiums will never go down. The Green Slip joke in NSW proves that. I have to pay at least $450 a year, and that is relatively cheap. On the old Rodeo we had worth $2000, it cost $800 a year for a Green Slip....and this is a mandatory insurance!

Look at Victoria where they regulate the price of the personal insurance with your rego, it's only about $300 for everybody. The only way insurance premiums would come down is to regulate them.

When I get full comp for my XR6 Turbo every year, most insurers are over $2000, I go with QBE every year because their price is $1500, doesn't ever change year to year. If competition worked in insurance those other prices would come down. By the way, I am over 30, no traffic infringements and no accidents.

If I bought the exact same insurance but had my address in Victoria, I would pay one third of the premium. Same sort of suburb too.

xisled · 15-10-2012, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by leighm

Insurance premiums will never go down. The Green Slip joke in NSW proves that. I have to pay at least $450 a year, and that is relatively cheap. On the old Rodeo we had worth $2000, it cost $800 a year for a Green Slip....and this is a mandatory insurance!

Look at Victoria where they regulate the price of the personal insurance with your rego, it's only about $300 for everybody. The only way insurance premiums would come down is to regulate them.

When I get full comp for my XR6 Turbo every year, most insurers are over $2000, I go with QBE every year because their price is $1500, doesn't ever change year to year. If competition worked in insurance those other prices would come down. By the way, I am over 30, no traffic infringements and no accidents.

If I bought the exact same insurance but had my address in Victoria, I would pay one third of the premium. Same sort of suburb too.

Insurance in Victoria for Comprehensive and Thirdparty property damage are very similar priced. VIC and NSW are the 2 most expensive states for comp and third party property damage insurance..

But back to the topic. Insurance is your personal choice, if you do not want to have it, you risk paying a huge bill if you have an accident.

Making everyone have insurance will not stop anything, Do you think if a 18 year old, who could barley even pay for insurance, had an accident, they would be able to pay the excess $1000 if they had an accident. Even if you do have insurance and you do not pay the excess, the insurance will not give a cent to anyone.

dimka100 · 15-10-2012, 05:36 PM

It will never happen, you can not just impose costs like that on people!

For people who think "If you don't have / can't afford insurance, then you can't afford to drive" ... well they same can be said "If you can't afford to have your car smashed/broken you can't afford the car!!!" ... everything can work both ways ...

Green slip is mandatory to purely protect the government so they are not forced to pay lifetime compensations for seriously injured people on the road. As for property damage it becomes purely a commercial matter that should be solved in a courtroom.

Ben73 · 15-10-2012, 05:59 PM

3rd should be complusary but that's it. If someone who is uninsured runs into me, I dont want to have to pay my $1000 excess to fix my car.
Also if you have full compo, doesn't that include everything that a green slip covers plus more?
Why do we have to pay for green slips if we already have full comprehensive or Third party?

Or is green slip strictly for injury's and third part/comprehensive strictly for property?

**GasoLane** · 15-10-2012, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fat4D

As a younger person who didn't have insurance for the first couple of years purely because instance companies slog young people to A point it's not affordable. I had a car worth 3000 and they wanted 900 a year for third party property.

It's not affordable if you happen to bump into a $200,000 Benz either.

They don't care how much your car is worth, they're gambling you wont hit anything too expensive for your $900.

2011G6E · 15-10-2012, 06:07 PM

Full comprehensive is crippling for anyone under 25...all our kids started out with basic third party insurance, then progressed to third party fire and theft, then when they reached 25 or were makiing enough money, on to full comp. You also start accumulating a no claim bonus from your first insurance, even basic third party.

Try over a grand for even an old car...more like $1500 plus for a new small car.

As for third party in your rego, I don't see why it's there...I'm covered full comprehensive on both our cars, with something ridiculous like $20 million damages to people and property (or, as one insurance guy jokingly put it when I signed up: "Now you could run over a bus queue of old people and then spear into a Rolls Royce dealership and trash a half dozen cars and you'd still be covered"

) . Why do I need the one in my rego which makes up the largest component? I know it covers not you, not your car, but the other guy, but so does "normal" insurance.

Insurance companies always whinge about having to pay money out, but hey, insurance is one big gamble...if you don't want to pay out, then don't get involved in the business. You can't honestly expect to collect policy payments for years and not have to actually pay some back now and then...do you...? I suspect we all know the answer to that...

Fiesta_Man69 · 15-10-2012, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tranquilized

What absolute garbage.

If you're that pro-insurance then obviously you'll have comprehensive yourself, in which case whether or not other drivers have insurance is none of your business.

You have no idea.

I was hit by a moron who had no insurance.

This was in my32gtr. Cost me $2000 excess. Plus lost my no claim bonus for a few years, costing me further. Chase them through the courts for costs? LOL - get real - some of us need to go to work and pay mortgages and not get strung up in the court system...

So, yes: its plenty of my business.

And, Mr. Yeti - if its good enough for you to register a $500 bomb and drive it towards me and my family and my car on a highway at up to 100kmh its good enough to insure comprehensively to cover you for any mishap that a dilapidated car may cause.

Arguements that full comp "is crippling etc" is pure bs - if you can afford the car then you can afford to insure it. Its like buying a GT and complaining about not being able to pay the fuel bills. Obviously, some people are in over their heads.

Fiesta_Man69 · 15-10-2012, 06:26 PM

And yes - I've always paid full comp since I was 17 - it meant I had to save up nd be financially responsible then buy a car within my financial means - both purchase, running and insurance costs. Obviously this concept is beyond people who believe its always someone else's problem....

**GasoLane** · 15-10-2012, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiesta_Man69

This was in my32gtr. Cost me $2000 excess. Plus lost my no claim bonus for a few years, costing me further. Chase them through the courts for costs? LOL - get real - some of us need to go to work and pay mortgages and not get strung up in the court system...

So, yes: its plenty of my business.

I thought it was the insurance companies job to "Chase them through courts" !

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiesta_Man69

And, Mr. Yeti - if its good enough for you to register a $500 bomb and drive it towards me and my family and my car on a highway at up to 100kmh its good enough to insure comprehensively to cover you for any mishap that a dilapidated car may cause.

I don't think you read his post properly.
He said that he HAS insurance to cover running into you, but not the insurance to cover repairing his $500 super-ute.

Fordman · 15-10-2012, 06:46 PM

In reading this thread I think some people dont actually know what the difference is between comprehensive and third party.

Suggesting comprehensive insurance should be compulsory is a joke. Tranquilized's comments is correct, if everyone had thirdy party then whats your concern for the other persons car? who cares? If they have third party you will get your property restored or replaced.

I think 3rd party should be compulsory it's not fair on other motorists if its not.

tranquilized · 15-10-2012, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiesta_Man69

You have no idea.

I was hit by a moron who had no insurance.

This was in my32gtr. Cost me $2000 excess. Plus lost my no claim bonus for a few years, costing me further. Chase them through the courts for costs? LOL - get real - some of us need to go to work and pay mortgages and not get strung up in the court system...

So, yes: its plenty of my business.

I have no idea? You dont seem to have any idea of the difference between comprehensive and third party insurance. All you need to worry about is having your own car repaired, why concern yourself with the other persons car?

Compulsory third party? Maybe. Compulsory comprehensive? Not a chance in hell.

2011G6E · 15-10-2012, 07:02 PM

Compulsory comprehensive is a joke...for one thing the insurance companies would never go for it...they'd have to insure everyone, and that wouldn't suit the bottom line. Yes, they'd make a lot of money in premiums at first, but then they'd be paying out a lot more in costs to insured young drivers who will, naturally and quite properly, make a claim for every little bingle.

They discourage people starting out from getting full comprehensive by simply keeping premiums ridiculously high. This keeps the number of young drivers with full comp low, which means that usually only the dedicated will actually get full comp from the start of their driving life, which means a lesser likelihood of payouts.

You would have to force them through legislation to keep premiums at a set level to allow everyone to afford them...and that won't happen while my bum points to the ground...

Fiesta_Man69 · 15-10-2012, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tranquilized

I have no idea? You dont seem to have any idea of the difference between comprehensive and third party insurance. All you need to worry about is having your own car repaired, why concern yourself with the other persons car?

Compulsory third party? Maybe. Compulsory comprehensive? Not a chance in hell.

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.

xisled · 15-10-2012, 07:36 PM

Ok for people who have no idea about what insurance is what.

There is 3 types of insurance.

1. Compulsory third party insurance. This covers you against hurting someone. The Compulsory Third Party Insurer will pay other person/s medical bills, compensation and such. This does not cover any damage you cause to property.

2. Third Party Property Damage, may also include fire and theft. This covers damage to the others person property, but not your own. If you have fire and theft your car is covered if it is stolen or destroyed by fire. This does not cover you if you hurt someone and they sue you for medical bills.

3. Full Comprehensive covers your car, and anyone else property you may damage. This does not cover you if you hurt anyone.

Your Third Party Property Damage Insurance and Fully Comprehensive Insurance policy may have 20 million dollars’ worth of property damage, but they will not pay a cent out for injury. If you think it does please, read the PDS.

The only insurance that covers people being hurt or killed is Compulsory Third Party Insurance. This insurance is a part of your registration, each state has their own system. You cannot register a car with no Compulsory Third Party Insurance.

Examples

-If you had have Compulsory Third Party Insurance and hit another car, you hurt the other driver, your Compulsory Third Party Insurance would only cover the medical bills to the other driver, not any damage to anyone's property.

-If you have Compulsory Third Party Insurance, Third Party Property Damage and you hit another car, you would be covered for the damage to the other persons property and anyone’s injuries you have cause.

-If you had Third Party Property Damage only and you did not have Compulsory Third Party Insurance, the damage to the other person property would be covered but not anyone’s injuries you have caused.

-If you have full Comprehensive and Compulsory Third Party Insurance and had an accident. All property would be covered and anyone’s injuries you have caused would be covered.

-If you have Full Comprehensive only and had an accident, all the property would be covered but not anyone’s injuries you have cause.

xisled · 15-10-2012, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Full comprehensive is crippling for anyone under 25...all our kids started out with basic third party insurance, then progressed to third party fire and theft, then when they reached 25 or were makiing enough money, on to full comp. You also start accumulating a no claim bonus from your first insurance, even basic third party.

Try over a grand for even an old car...more like $1500 plus for a new small car.

As for third party in your rego, I don't see why it's there...I'm covered full comprehensive on both our cars, with something ridiculous like $20 million damages to people and property (or, as one insurance guy jokingly put it when I signed up: "Now you could run over a bus queue of old people and then spear into a Rolls Royce dealership and trash a half dozen cars and you'd still be covered"

) . Why do I need the one in my rego which makes up the largest component? I know it covers not you, not your car, but the other guy, but so does "normal" insurance.

Insurance companies always whinge about having to pay money out, but hey, insurance is one big gamble...if you don't want to pay out, then don't get involved in the business. You can't honestly expect to collect policy payments for years and not have to actually pay some back now and then...do you...? I suspect we all know the answer to that...

Comprehensive insurance does not cover for any injuries, medicals bills etc.
So you need Compulsory third party as well as Comprehensive, to be fully 100 precent covered.

XB GS 351 Coupe · 15-10-2012, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xisled

Ok for people who have no idea about what insurance is what.

There is 3 types of insurance.

1. Compulsory third party insurance. This covers you against hurting someone. The Compulsory Third Party Insurer will pay other person/s medical bills, compensation and such. This does not cover any damage you cause to property.

2. Third Party Property Damage, may also include fire and theft. This covers damage to the others person property, but not your own. If you have fire and theft your car is covered if it is stolen or destroyed by fire. This does not cover you if you hurt someone and they sue you for medical bills.

3. Full Comprehensive covers your car, and anyone else property you may damage. This does not cover you if you hurt anyone.

Your Third Party Property Damage Insurance and Fully Comprehensive Insurance policy may have 20 million dollars’ worth of property damage, but they will not pay a cent out for injury. If you think it does please, read the PDS.

The only insurance that covers people being hurt or killed is Compulsory Third Party Insurance. This insurance is a part of your registration, each state has their own system. You cannot register a car with no Compulsory Third Party Insurance.

Examples

-If you had have Compulsory Third Party Insurance and hit another car, you hurt the other driver, your Compulsory Third Party Insurance would only cover the medical bills to the other driver, not any damage to anyone's property.

-If you have Compulsory Third Party Insurance, Third Party Property Damage and you hit another car, you would be covered for the damage to the other persons property and anyone’s injuries you have cause.

-If you had Third Party Property Damage only and you did not have Compulsory Third Party Insurance, the damage to the other person property would be covered but not anyone’s injuries you have caused.

-If you have full Comprehensive and Compulsory Third Party Insurance and had an accident. All property would be covered and anyone’s injuries you have caused would be covered.

-If you have Full Comprehensive only and had an accident, all the property would be covered but not anyone’s injuries you have cause.

Finally someone that talks sense, I was reading this thread and was amazed at how little people know about insurance.

Please everyone read the above post and understand it before taking out your next policy, as that is how insurance works.

PS if you can not afford to insure your car you can not afford to drive a car....SIMPLE.....stay with public transport until you are financially secure enough to be able to afford to BUY, REGISTER, MAINTAIN AND INSURE A CAR!

I mean if you can't afford insurance how will afford paying for the damages once you run into that brand new Mercedes, or drive into that shop window after you have been unable to stop in the wet as you could not afford new tires and brake pads!

dieseltrain79 · 15-10-2012, 08:21 PM

No it shouldn't be compulsory , as there are people who've been driving for 10 years that have the traits of a p plater !

FiestaMan .. If you had full comp you don't chase anything . My wife's car was written off by a unregistered uninsured driver . We paid nothing , it was all chased up by insurance company .

vanman_75 · 15-10-2012, 08:48 PM

So in a nutshell I think we all agree , every driver should at least have enougg insurance to coverthe other drivers full costs ...not just p platers and yes i agree...

LTDHO · 16-10-2012, 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiesta_Man69

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

It is a myth, it simply does not exist. I have found those who haven't read the 'standard print' will rant about the fine print.

Quote:

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

I was reading this thread and was amazed at how little people know about insurance..

Most road uses don't. they shop for the cheapest and pay that. No idea what is in the PDS.

Quote:

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

Please everyone read the above post and understand it before taking out your next policy, as that is how insurance works.

They don't want to. Insurers send out PDS with every renewal, no one reads them. They simply pay and move on. The insurer could slip a $50 cheque in each PDS and have no fear of going broke.

Rodp · 16-10-2012, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiesta_Man69

I was hit by a moron who had no insurance.

This was in my32gtr. Cost me $2000 excess. Plus lost my no claim bonus for a few years, costing me further. Chase them through the courts for costs? LOL - get real - some of us need to go to work and pay mortgages and not get strung up in the court system...

Don't know what insurance company you're with - but I'd change.

I've been hit by an uninsured driver before (though, many years ago) when I was with NRMA. Police report indicated the other driver was at fault. Filled in some paper work nominating the at fault driver, picked up a loan car, got the call when my car was ready, all done and dusted. No excess and no loss of NCB.