Convicted Driver Insurance

Compare quotes from leading covicted driver insurance specialists in the UK

Get Quotes

Insurance is £700 cheaper with a DR10 conviction??

price1367

TTC Group
I have told you this before, Hill House Hammond insurance brokers.
That doesn't help drink drivers now, for 2 reasons. Firstly brokers do not provide insurance cover, they source it from insurance companies, so we still do not not know the name of an insurance company that provides cheaper insurance. Secondly that is well out of date because Hill House Hammond went out of business 9 years ago. (Perhaps it was because they were offering silly quotes?) What was left was taken over by Aviva, and this is what they say on their website:

Motorists who are convicted of drink-driving could find that the incident impacts upon their car insurance premiums in the long term, stated a spokesperson for ABI, although another consequence could include being unable to drive for a job.


"One conviction of drink-driving could mean that many companies won't insure you, at best you'll find insurance very expensive [and] there's a financial cost to drink-driving as well as a social and a legal one," he added.


http://broker.aviva.co.uk/news/article/7060/abi-warns-of-expensive-drink-driving-costs/

Telling people that there was a good deal to be had 26 years ago does not help drink drivers now.
 

chiefmegawatty

Well-known member
That doesn't help drink drivers now, for 2 reasons. Firstly brokers do not provide insurance cover, they source it from insurance companies, so we still do not not know the name of an insurance company that provides cheaper insurance. Secondly that is well out of date because Hill House Hammond went out of business 9 years ago. (Perhaps it was because they were offering silly quotes?) What was left was taken over by Aviva, and this is what they say on their website:

Motorists who are convicted of drink-driving could find that the incident impacts upon their car insurance premiums in the long term, stated a spokesperson for ABI, although another consequence could include being unable to drive for a job.


"One conviction of drink-driving could mean that many companies won't insure you, at best you'll find insurance very expensive [and] there's a financial cost to drink-driving as well as a social and a legal one," he added.


http://broker.aviva.co.uk/news/article/7060/abi-warns-of-expensive-drink-driving-costs/

Telling people that there was a good deal to be had 26 years ago does not help drink drivers now.
How can drink driving now be any more serious than it was 26 years ago?
The legal limit is the same as it was then so why should insurance premiums be much greater now?
Seems to me to be a money making scam by insurance companies.
Many paople think that insurance companies are there to provide a service. I think they only exist to
make money.
I also get the impression that huge insurance premiums for recent drink drivers implies that the insurance companies
think that the punishment and any following courses are ineffective.
Reading between the lines they are just using this to increase profits.
 

price1367

TTC Group
Thisevening I have continued to try to find where insurance is cheaper after a drink driving ban, as claimed.

in this first one for MSN cars:
How much is a normal car insurance premium?


The sample quotes looked at a range of different driving infringements for a 30-year-old male advertising account manager from Ipswich driving a five-year-old Ford Focus, analysing everything from minor speeding violations to serious offences, such as causing serious injury by dangerous driving.


With a clean licence, this driver would pay £387 per year for his car insurance. How does that change with different motoring convictions?

they found a 70% increase for a DR10 conviction. It is quite long, here is the link:


http://cars.uk.msn.com/news/how-motoring-convictions-affect-your-car-insurance


this is from the comparison website tiger.co.uk. Which compares 130 insurance companies.
they looked at a typical driver, firstly with no convictions, then the same driver with differing convictions, and they show the 3 best quotes in each case.
a dr10 conviction resulted in a 76.9% increase in the premium:

https://www.pressdispensary.co.uk/releases/c993016/Counting-The-Cost-of-Driving-Convictions.html

However, there could be some good news. If, for example, you want to lease a car, with insurance included in the agreement, then the premium might not be higher, but the excess would increase significantly.
An example of this is the link below. If you work for the NHS (there will be other companies probably offering similar) then NHS Fleet Solutions will lease you a variety of cars from £158 per month (Peugeot 107) including insurance. The excess for a driver with no convictions is £250, with a DR10 this rises to £850, plus you have to take an education course that costs £280. The monthly cost, however, stays the same. I do not know what this course involves. Not so good for people under 23 and a DR10, because this then has to be referred to the insurance company for a decision on acceptance, or not.....
the website say that they also offer this service to other Public Sector Organisations.
If DR10 is your only conviction, exploring a company lease option could be very cost effective. Hopefully this will be of use to some visitors to the Forum.
http://www.nhsfleetsolutions.co.uk/resources/driver-handbook.aspx
 

price1367

TTC Group
How can drink driving now be any more serious than it was 26 years ago?
The legal limit is the same as it was then so why should insurance premiums be much greater now?
Seems to me to be a money making scam by insurance companies.
Many paople think that insurance companies are there to provide a service. I think they only exist to
make money.
I also get the impression that huge insurance premiums for recent drink drivers implies that the insurance companies
think that the punishment and any following courses are ineffective.
Reading between the lines they are just using this to increase profits.
There are some sites that have a place called the Flame Pit for comments like this, perhaps this Forum should adopt one as well.
If you do not know what a 'Flame Pit' is, it is a place for rants and off topic posts.

A legitimate question has been asked about the cost of insurance after a drink drive conviction. Some posters have tried to show, with sources quoted, what the impact of drink driving is on insurance rates. Others have made claims that they have not, and cannot, substantiate.... and then resort to simple griping about the insurance system, which contributes nothing to the question that has been posed. This is highlighted in the above quote saying that insurance companies should be there to provide a service, not to make money. At last we have agreement on something. I am sure as well that insurance companies are there to make money, like any other commercial business in this world. They do not appear to be too good at making money, however, despite the claim above. If you look at the link from the Daily Telegraph below, you will see that a spokesperson from Earnst and Young said that the car insurance industry overall has been making a loss for 2 decades:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/insurance/9357379/Brake-to-remain-on-car-insurers-profits.html


As to the courses being ineffective, insurance costs DO increase after a person has done a drink drive rehabilitation course, but by LESS than the increase for people who have not done a course. I know because we conduct test 'purchases' to verify that insurance brokers who say they offer beneficial rates to people who complete a course actually DO offer better rates. They offer this because people who attend courses have been PROVED to be caught drink driving much less often over the next several years than those who do not attend a course. (7% versus 18.6%, verified by The Transport Research Laboratory)
 

Forum Moderator

Staff member
How can drink driving now be any more serious than it was 26 years ago?
The legal limit is the same as it was then so why should insurance premiums be much greater now?
Seems to me to be a money making scam by insurance companies.
Many paople think that insurance companies are there to provide a service. I think they only exist to
make money.
I also get the impression that huge insurance premiums for recent drink drivers implies that the insurance companies
think that the punishment and any following courses are ineffective.
Reading between the lines they are just using this to increase profits.
An increase in insurance premiums is not another form of punishment. Insurance companies use a method known as 'Risk Selection and Analysis Criteria' in order to help determine exactly how much a motor insurance policy will cost. Part of this procedure is to examine a persons driving history including convictions. Having a drink driving conviction inevitably leads to insurance companies increasing the premium due to the fact they class drivers who have been convicted of driving with excess alcohol a higher financial risk. Every insurance company calculates the level of risk proposed differently which is why insurance premiums vary considerably between insurers and why comparing quotes and comparison systems are common.

There are some sites that have a place called the Flame Pit for comments like this, perhaps this Forum should adopt one as well. If you do not know what a 'Flame Pit' is, it is a place for rants and off topic posts.
Flaming is actually prohibited on these forums, flaming is classed as hostile and insulting interaction between forum users. While you may not agree with the opinions of chiefmegawatty, there has been no evidence of 'flaming' on this thread.
 
Last edited:

price1367

TTC Group
I am sorry if I have misunderstood the term flame pit. I understood it was where replies that were simply moans and did not help a debate were moved to, or an area of a website to just complain about something rather than be constructive.
I am not suggesting that any of the posts made on this thread were insulting or hostile. If that is the true interpretation of flaming then I apologise for suggesting that someone has done that.
(At 60 years of age I accept that I do not always understand the latest terminology, I just looked on one other forum and that is what they called their off topic posts and moans. Having now looked at other forums, they agree with this sites' definition so I stand corrected)
 

chiefmegawatty

Well-known member
I am sorry if I have misunderstood the term flame pit. I understood it was where replies that were simply moans and did not help a debate were moved to, or an area of a website to just complain about something rather than be constructive.
I am not suggesting that any of the posts made on this thread were insulting or hostile. If that is the true interpretation of flaming then I apologise for suggesting that someone has done that.
(At 60 years of age I accept that I do not always understand the latest terminology, I just looked on one other forum and that is what they called their off topic posts and moans. Having now looked at other forums, they agree with this sites' definition so I stand corrected)
Having thought about myself and my friends cheap re-insurance costs after a drink drive conviction, I wonder if the following
may have had an influence on this.
Both my friend and I had been driving for many years previously with no accidents, no convictions and full no claims
bonuses. Just a thought.
I also suepect that young drink drivers may be hammered far more by insurance companies compared to older drivers.
Both my friend and I are getting uncomfortably close to 60 so I guess it's free bus pass time soon.
What a scary thought!
 

price1367

TTC Group
You are right to say that young drivers are hammered far more than older people. I have seen them quoted £5000 to insure an 'ordinary' car. I suspect that is not a real offer of insurance, it is the company saying : "we don't really want you."
older people, however, still do see their premiums go up by 40% and more, even with no previous convictions. If you look at some of the quotes I listed before, some were for people in their 40's with no previous convictions.
For people who get more than a 2 year ban, they also see their insurance rocket because no claims bonus only carries forward for 2 years, so if they have had a 3 year ban, and have been without insurance for that time, they get an increase that reflects 3 years of inflation, the cost of the DR10 and the loss of their no claims. That is why I always suggest that people downsize their type of car for a while, so the increase is only on a lower insurance group.
I am looking to renew my insurance this weekend, I have arrived at 60, so ahead of you, (and to warn you, I found it a bit scary, taking stock of my life!) so I will do it online and see what a drink drive conviction would do to my insurance versus no convictions.
Don't forget you also receive free prescriptions, that softened the blow a bit.........
 

price1367

TTC Group
So, here is the results of my insurance search.....
i am currently with Swiftcover. They have sent me a renewal quote for £290.
it is for a 1994 Audi 80 that my wife uses to go to and from work, and I own and use as well, as a second vehicle.
7 years NCD on this policy, protected no claims. Remember, I am 60, my wife is 49.
putting my details into comparethemarket.com, the best 10 quotes range between £131 to £147 (I do live in a rural area, which helps a lot!)
when I add a DR10, from December 2012, £200 fine, 12 month ban with a reading of 50, the best 10 quotes range between £188 to £219
the excess also rose from between £350 to £450 without a DR10 to £400 to £575 with a DR10
This shows an increase of 40 to 60%, which is the figure that I said previously I warn people to expect.
Incidentally, when I looked at the list of insurance companies that quoted, Swiftcover were offering insurance for me at £230, so much for customer loyalty when my renewal is £290! When I added the DR10 though, they did not appear on the list, so I can only conclude that they declined to quote.
maybe people find insurance cheaper after a drink drive conviction because they then shop around, like I have just done. The top 20 quotes with a DR10 were cheaper than my quote for renewal now, so I am glad that I did this exercise and halved the cost of my insurance!
 

chiefmegawatty

Well-known member
So, here is the results of my insurance search.....
i am currently with Swiftcover. They have sent me a renewal quote for £290.
it is for a 1994 Audi 80 that my wife uses to go to and from work, and I own and use as well, as a second vehicle.
7 years NCD on this policy, protected no claims. Remember, I am 60, my wife is 49.
putting my details into comparethemarket.com, the best 10 quotes range between £131 to £147 (I do live in a rural area, which helps a lot!)
when I add a DR10, from December 2012, £200 fine, 12 month ban with a reading of 50, the best 10 quotes range between £188 to £219
the excess also rose from between £350 to £450 without a DR10 to £400 to £575 with a DR10
This shows an increase of 40 to 60%, which is the figure that I said previously I warn people to expect.
Incidentally, when I looked at the list of insurance companies that quoted, Swiftcover were offering insurance for me at £230, so much for customer loyalty when my renewal is £290! When I added the DR10 though, they did not appear on the list, so I can only conclude that they declined to quote.
maybe people find insurance cheaper after a drink drive conviction because they then shop around, like I have just done. The top 20 quotes with a DR10 were cheaper than my quote for renewal now, so I am glad that I did this exercise and halved the cost of my insurance!
Interesting stuff indeed. Well during 2012 my car insurance cost me £12.48 per month on a group 12 two litre car.
My renewal this year was 42% higher with no explanation as to the huge increase.
Maybe I am guilty of not shopping around but I accepted the increase because I still considered it to be very competitive
anyway. I have had sevaral insurance companies write to me offering to beat my current premium. I phoned them all and none
of them could compete with my current insurance premium.
I have also noticed that as I get older my driving has become very gentle, very slow and very considerate of other drivers.
I have no interest in speed as I did as a young man. I drive in a gentle defensive manner with total concentration on the road.
I therefore realise that vastly reduced insurance premiums for older drivers do make sense.
Interestingly, in the last three years I have been in two situations where a car is coming straight towards me on the
wrong side of the road at considerable speed. On both occasions I tool quick evasive action to avoid a head-on collision.
Despite these two occasions being around three years apart, the vehicles and drivers involved were connected by their
employment. Can you guess who both drivers worked for?
 

meercat666

Well-known member
maybe people find insurance cheaper after a drink drive conviction because they then shop around, like I have just done. The top 20 quotes with a DR10 were cheaper than my quote for renewal now, so I am glad that I did this exercise and halved the cost of my insurance!
I am a bit confused with this thread and especially the above post!!! Is this an admission that the Original Poster & chiefmegawatty were RIGHT once again and it is possible for insurance quotes to come down if you have a DR10?
 

price1367

TTC Group
What I was trying to say is that like for like insurance DOES go UP after a drink drive conviction. The quotes showed a 40 to 60% increase for me, even at 60 years of age with a a low drink drive reading of 50. However, if you have been with an insurance company for a while, and they have raised their premiums regularly, when you come to re insure and then shop around, you could find how uncompetitive your old insurance was.
In my case, Swiftcover wanted £290 for a renewal. After a hypothetical drink drive conviction, by shopping round, I could see insurance for £188.... BUT, the same company would have insured me for £131 without a drink drive conviction. For direct comparison, after the 'conviction' Swiftcover did not even quote.
The lesson from this is to always check your renewal quotes each year, but also to avoid drink drive convictions because they DO raise your insurance considerably.
as to the original poster and Chiefmegawatty being right once again (!!!).... other than quoting an insurance broker that went out of business 9 years ago, relating to a claimed quote from 26 years ago, and a claim, with no details that can be checked, that there was a £700 saving AFTER a drink drive conviction, there is no evidence that you will get cheaper like for like insurance after a DR10. There is plenty of evidence, that I have produced, to show that the premiums go UP considerably.
if you follow any of the links that I have posted, they all say the same thing. This is EVIDENCE, not speculation.
 

chiefmegawatty

Well-known member
What I was trying to say is that like for like insurance DOES go UP after a drink drive conviction. The quotes showed a 40 to 60% increase for me, even at 60 years of age with a a low drink drive reading of 50. However, if you have been with an insurance company for a while, and they have raised their premiums regularly, when you come to re insure and then shop around, you could find how uncompetitive your old insurance was.
In my case, Swiftcover wanted £290 for a renewal. After a hypothetical drink drive conviction, by shopping round, I could see insurance for £188.... BUT, the same company would have insured me for £131 without a drink drive conviction. For direct comparison, after the 'conviction' Swiftcover did not even quote.
The lesson from this is to always check your renewal quotes each year, but also to avoid drink drive convictions because they DO raise your insurance considerably.
as to the original poster and Chiefmegawatty being right once again (!!!).... other than quoting an insurance broker that went out of business 9 years ago, relating to a claimed quote from 26 years ago, and a claim, with no details that can be checked, that there was a £700 saving AFTER a drink drive conviction, there is no evidence that you will get cheaper like for like insurance after a DR10. There is plenty of evidence, that I have produced, to show that the premiums go UP considerably.
if you follow any of the links that I have posted, they all say the same thing. This is EVIDENCE, not speculation.
I was disqualified 26 years ago but my friend was disqualified twelve years ago. When he got his licence back his insurance
didn't increase at all. That is a fact and not an opinion. He wasn't with an insurance broker but directly dealing with an insurance company. Insurance brokers deal with insurance companies so I am puzzled why you think my cheap insurance with a DR10
endorsement is due to the insurance broker. Hill House Hammond going bust has nothing to do with their insurance quotes
for drink drivers. They probably went bust due to joy riders stealing expensive cars and smashing them up.
26 years ago I was caught for risking an accident but not actually having an accident.
I think that risking an accident is far less serious than actually having an accident.
Maybe you think that actually having an acccident is far less serious than just risking an accident.
 

price1367

TTC Group
What I am looking for, and I am sure many drink drivers are looking for, is the name of an insurance company that offers reduced insurance for drink drivers against what they were paying before they were caught A like for like example.
Nothing has been quoted that can be checked, as in the name of an insurance company and details that can be verified.
i have quoted several examples, including my own, that can be checked and verified, that shows increases of 40% plus after a DR10 going on a licence.
i don't find it helpful for you to keep saying that your friend got his insurance reduced 12 years ago, and you got yours reduced 26 years ago. You have said that you and your friend have the paperwork to prove it, so can we have the name of the insurance companies involved, with an age for the driver and the type of car, so readers can check for themselves. I have asked that these details be quoted before, so readers can benefit now, but you just keep repeating that it is a fact, without producing evidence.
If readers follow my direct links, or put their details into comparethemarket.com, they will see how insurance goes up. I would love them to be able to follow a link from you, or to be able to contact the insurance companies that you and your friend used, and find that their insurance goes down.
I mentioned that it does not help saying that you got your insurance through HillHouseHammond because they would have dealt with over 100 insurance companies. What readers need is the name of the insurance company that you insured with, especially as they cannot contact the brokers now.
I would love to find that you are right, but as another poster said, if your insurance goes down after a drink drive conviction, won't people start to falsely claim to have a DR10 to get cheaper insurance? It just does not make sense.
Risking an accident is less serious than having an accident. That is why the magistrates have flexibility in their sentencing powers and can give a longer ban to someone drink driving who causes an accident versus someone with the same reading who does not have an accident.

In case you have forgotten, this is what you said in an earlier post:

"Boxer I have the paperwork here to prove you wrong regarding insurance premiums increasing with a DR10.
My friend also has paperwork from his insurance company to prove you wrong."

Can you therefore PLEASE tell us the secret of cheaper insurance and quote the details for people to use.....
 

chiefmegawatty

Well-known member
What I am looking for, and I am sure many drink drivers are looking for, is the name of an insurance company that offers reduced insurance for drink drivers against what they were paying before they were caught A like for like example.
Nothing has been quoted that can be checked, as in the name of an insurance company and details that can be verified.
i have quoted several examples, including my own, that can be checked and verified, that shows increases of 40% plus after a DR10 going on a licence.
i don't find it helpful for you to keep saying that your friend got his insurance reduced 12 years ago, and you got yours reduced 26 years ago. You have said that you and your friend have the paperwork to prove it, so can we have the name of the insurance companies involved, with an age for the driver and the type of car, so readers can check for themselves. I have asked that these details be quoted before, so readers can benefit now, but you just keep repeating that it is a fact, without producing evidence.
If readers follow my direct links, or put their details into comparethemarket.com, they will see how insurance goes up. I would love them to be able to follow a link from you, or to be able to contact the insurance companies that you and your friend used, and find that their insurance goes down.
I mentioned that it does not help saying that you got your insurance through HillHouseHammond because they would have dealt with over 100 insurance companies. What readers need is the name of the insurance company that you insured with, especially as they cannot contact the brokers now.
I would love to find that you are right, but as another poster said, if your insurance goes down after a drink drive conviction, won't people start to falsely claim to have a DR10 to get cheaper insurance? It just does not make sense.
Risking an accident is less serious than having an accident. That is why the magistrates have flexibility in their sentencing powers and can give a longer ban to someone drink driving who causes an accident versus someone with the same reading who does not have an accident.

In case you have forgotten, this is what you said in an earlier post:

"Boxer I have the paperwork here to prove you wrong regarding insurance premiums increasing with a DR10.
My friend also has paperwork from his insurance company to prove you wrong."

Can you therefore PLEASE tell us the secret of cheaper insurance and quote the details for people to use.....
You have misinterpreted my comments regarding risking accidents and having accidents.
I have met many people over the years who have caused accidents despite not drinking. None of them have been disqualified.
I have met many people like myself who have been disqualified for failing a breath test despite not having an accident.
Therefore people like myself were disqualified for risking an accident rather than actually having an accident.
Surely a sober driver who actually causes an accident should be banned from driving compared to a driver who is driving
safely who fails a random breath test.
My daughter was hit by a driver who hadn't been drinking so he kept his licence.
I was banned for failing a random breath test and I have never ran over anybody.
 

Forum Moderator

Staff member
Therefore people like myself were disqualified for risking an accident rather than actually having an accident.
Surely a sober driver who actually causes an accident should be banned from driving compared to a driver who is driving safely who fails a random breath test.
The above statement is a contradiction in terms.

A driver who fails a breath test because they were driving while exceeding the maximum legal prescribed limit and as a result, as you correctly point out, were 'risking an accident', simply cannot be classed as a 'driver who is driving safely'. This is precisely the reason why driving with excess alcohol is illegal in the UK and the majority of other countries in the world, this is also why insurance companies class drivers who have been convicted of this offence as a higher risk and subsequently increase their insurance premiums.

Please keep this thread on topic: i.e. The cost of insurance after a DR10 conviction.

Can you provide the name of the insurance company that underwrit your insurance policy and charged a premium that was cheaper with a DR10 conviction than it was without a DR10 conviction?
 
Last edited:

chiefmegawatty

Well-known member
The above statement is a contradiction in terms.

A driver who fails a breath test because they were driving while exceeding the maximum legal prescribed limit and as a result, as you correctly point out, were 'risking an accident', simply cannot be classed as a 'driver who is driving safely'. This is precisely the reason why driving with excess alcohol is illegal in the UK and the majority of other countries in the world, this is also why insurance companies class drivers who have been convicted of this offence as a higher risk and subsequently increase their insurance premiums.

Please keep this thread on topic: i.e. The cost of insurance after a DR10 conviction.

Can you provide the name of the insurance company that underwrit your insurance policy and charged a premium that was cheaper with a DR10 conviction than it was without a DR10 conviction?
My re-insurance after my disqualification didn't go down, it increased slightly.
My friends insurance after his disqualification didn't increase at all.
However, my insurance jumped up when a drugged joy rider stole my car and crashed it into five other vehicles.
I was therefore financially punished for an event that had nothing to do with me.
Comments welcome.
 

price1367

TTC Group
My comment, which has been made several times, and now repeated by the moderator, is:
can you name the company, or indeed ANY insurance company, where you get cheaper insurance after a drink drive conviction.
you have said that you and your friend have paperwork about it. Why therefore, can you not tell us which companies are involved?
Perhaps you could do the same as I have, and put your details into comparethemarket.com, with and without a DR10 and tell us what you get as a result. Then publish the result for us all to see what the up to date situation is, not what may have happened years ago.
The only valid way that comments can be made about insurance in this situation is a like for like comparison. If I had a BMW. 3 litre car, then got a drink drive ban, then when I re insured I had moved to a less risky postcode, or bought a VW Polo instead, I might find that my insurance was less, but that would not be due to having a drink drive conviction, it would be the other factors that reduced the insurance by more than the increase in premium for a drink drive conviction.
 

ukboxer

Well-known member

chiefmegawatty

Well-known member
My comment, which has been made several times, and now repeated by the moderator, is:
can you name the company, or indeed ANY insurance company, where you get cheaper insurance after a drink drive conviction.
you have said that you and your friend have paperwork about it. Why therefore, can you not tell us which companies are involved?
Perhaps you could do the same as I have, and put your details into comparethemarket.com, with and without a DR10 and tell us what you get as a result. Then publish the result for us all to see what the up to date situation is, not what may have happened years ago.
The only valid way that comments can be made about insurance in this situation is a like for like comparison. If I had a BMW. 3 litre car, then got a drink drive ban, then when I re insured I had moved to a less risky postcode, or bought a VW Polo instead, I might find that my insurance was less, but that would not be due to having a drink drive conviction, it would be the other factors that reduced the insurance by more than the increase in premium for a drink drive conviction.
I never said that my insurance and my friends insurance went down, I said that our insurance went up very slightly or not at all.
My friend is now looking for his insurance renewal datails after he got his licence back.
 
Top