Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Insurance Problems - Not at fault claims effecting insurance

Discussion in 'Businesses and Service Providers' started by taiheung, Jul 10, 2007.

  1. Hey fellas,

    As you know - I have horrible luck when it comes to riding. In the period of 6 months my bike has been hit 3 times. Only one of those times was I actually moving, and only 2/3 times was I even on the bikes. All 3 accidents were not at fault and the negligence of the other party.

    However, lately I've been trying to track down other insurers who will cover my gear as at the moment AAMI will only cover me for a maximum of $1000 in gear IF I take out a home and contents insurance policy of $200. This would be okay if it weren't for the fact my gear totals close to $1800.

    My issue is that lately I've either been receiving ridiculously high quotes or being denied insurance all together. When asked why, it is due to the high number of claims I've had even though they were all not at fault!

    Personally I don't see luck as something that should be considered when calculating insurance but that's the message I'm getting at the moment. I don't understand. If I continue my policy with AAMI these accidents will not effect my rating or premium, if I cancel and look around they will. To further this, if not at fault claims do effect insurance then this would suggest that in some way I contributed to the accident - which would then suggest that in truth I was in some way at fault. Which would mean the not at fault status is a sham!

    Everyone I have spoken to on the phone has not yet been able to provide me with an answer - this includes senior management.

    Please, can someone help me out here?
    I would be satisfied with just knowing the logic behind their reasoning.
  2. Caveat: I don't know that much about the insurance business, so if anyone wants to correct me feel free...

    But I reckon it all comes down to pure number crunching. In the end, the insurance companies are out to make a profit. They take a gamble with people giving them money and (from the insurance companies perspective) hopefully never wanting it back (making a claim).

    Unfortunately for you, the numbers just aren't adding up for them. You've given them $X amount of dollars, and they've had to give you $Y amount back. The difference between X and Y obviously falls outside their 'acceptable' range, so they have said that because you cost them more moneys than others in a similar situation, that you should pay them more moneys in return.

    It's not a very fair way of doing things (and I'm assuming it's how they all do it, I don't know), but nobody ever said insurance was supposed to be fair. You took a gamble with the insurance company, you won a couple of times, now they've changed the odds... :?
  3. fcukers.
  4. maybe send a PM to MG; he's an insurance guru and he might be able to offer some qualified advice....
  5. ........
  6. The problem you may have is that you have made non at fault claims but you weren't able to provide the insurance company the details of the at fault party. So bassically they count those claims as at fault as they can't recover the costs of the claim from anyone.

  7. ........
  8. Awesome reply MG, lots of info, must have taken ages to type.

    Basically, insurers are in business to make profits. One accident (even not at fault) is unlucky, but 3 accidents might indicate to their risk profile that you are a risk to insure, hence the premiums.

    Last year I had 1 big off and another little one (slow speed, high damage). I chose to absorb the cost of the latter in order to remain insurable. In this instance, both would have been considered 'At Fault'.
  9. That was really informative!

    To go back a bit - all my claims have been recoverable through the other party I was even lucky enough to catch the guy who hit my bike when parked. As for the AAMI premium thing - as you have suggested I have not actually received my renewal yet. I was jumping the gun to protect my gear prior to an accident. I had been lead to believe that my premium would not change as I was clearly informed that my rating would not change, and that the accidents where I was not at fault would not have an effect on my policy.

    I've seen the contents insurance option - this effects no claim though right? My father has said that losing the no claim is not worth insuring my gear. Would this be correct?

    I've sent you a PM - I guess my biggest question is where to go from here? Is this the end of the line? Do I just bend over and cop what the insurance companies are dealing me?

    I feel like this is some how an example of misleading conduct. :?
  10. All insurance is a scam. How often do you hear of somebody needing to claim and the insurance company will do everything in their power to avoid honouring the claim.

    We will see it with all the floods down gippsland way. A lot of insurance policies exclude flood damage.

    I dislike insurance companies almost as much as I hate banks and their thieving ways.
  11. :woot: I just finished reading MG's version of War & Peace. It only took me 5 days. :LOL: :LOL:

    Seriuosly, great post MG, glad to see someone knows their sh!t.
    Good work.
  12. Bullshit they do :?
  13. Unless you get burgled! What if you're out in the car & your gear is at home!