Car Insurance

[AtW]

Yes, it's cheap because you don't get the extras the expensive ones have.

Yes, extras like peace of mind knowing that should the worst happen the insurance company is big enough to actually pay out rather than fall back to some small print you miss and leave you high and dry facing jail sentence for driving without insurance.

Insurance companies will sell you any policy for any price - making a claim on it however is totally different matter.

[Moscow Mule]

Yes, extras like peace of mind knowing that should the worst happen the insurance company is big enough to actually pay out rather than fall back to some small print you miss and leave you high and dry facing jail sentence for driving without insurance.

Insurance companies will sell you any policy for any price - making a claim on it however is totally different matter.

We have a regulated insurance company in this country. If you don't lie, you're covered.

Give it up.

[AtW]

We have a regulated insurance company in this country. If you don't lie, you're covered.

That's what you think

[Moscow Mule]

That's what you think

Do you have evidence to back up your assertion?

I've got evidence to back up mine.

[AtW]

I've got evidence to back up mine.

You've been in a car accident with payout over £1 mln and your cheapest possible insurance paid out?

The main point here is that a guy who has got contract in London with daily rate surely exceeding annual cost of insurance tries to cut down few more quid to get it even cheaper, it's not like one quote was 1000 and another 200 - ffs, if you go right to the bottom then you'll get what you paid for.

[TimberWolf]

You've been in a car accident with payout over £1 mln and your cheapest possible insurance paid out?

Can you cite a single instance in recorded UK car insurance history where an insurer didn't pay out third party losses and that the party of the first part ended up coughing up substantial damages to the party of the third part rather than the first party's insurer?

Supplementary questions:
Who is the second party, if anyone? Is it the insurer or the insured?
Who pays if for example a bicyclist hits a car/pedestrian and it's the cyclist fault?

[Moscow Mule]

Who pays if for example a bicyclist hits a car/pedestrian and it's the cyclist fault?

IIRC, the cyclist if they can be proven to have been negligent. But you have to go to court to prove it and cyclists don't have insurance so it's not worth it.

[AtW]

Can you cite a single instance in recorded UK car insurance history where an insurer didn't pay out third party losses and that the party of the first part ended up coughing up substantial damages to the party of the third part rather than the first party's insurer?

The insurer probably would pay 3rd party in serious accidents but they will look all they can to invalidate your insurance and make you personally liable for the amounts they pay out.

The main point here is different though - someone who earns big $$$ in London looks to save a few quid on insurance and driving a cheap banger (such cars should not be in the road as their owners won't value their or other people's cars).

[TimberWolf]

The insurer probably would pay 3rd party in serious accidents but they will look all they can to invalidate your insurance and make you personally liable for the amounts they pay out.

Has this ever happened in reality though?

[DiscoStu]

The insurer probably would pay 3rd party in serious accidents but they will look all they can to invalidate your insurance and make you personally liable for the amounts they pay out.

The main point here is different though - someone who earns big $$$ in London looks to save a few quid on insurance and driving a cheap banger (such cars should not be in the road as their owners won't value their or other people's cars).

This is one of those times when you make an utterly invalid point, fail to admit that you're wrong, then keep going thus making yourself look like a complete cock.

HTH