Insurance is £700 cheaper with a DR10 conviction??

[ukboxer]

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.

As previously requested many times can you PLEASE give us the name of the insurance company you and your friend are using! (not the broker but the actual insurer)

If they are indeed offering insurance with a very slight increase or no increase at all then every convicted drink driver visiting this site will benefit by using them also.

 

[price1367]

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.

That will only help show if your claim that insurance did not go up 16 years ago was true.
to help people wanting insurance NOW, have you taken up my request to put your details into a comparison website to find out what happens to a drink driver today. I have quoted several sources that quote a 40 to 60% increase, and shown that when I put my own detail in for the renewal for my wife's car on comparethemarket.com that these are the figures that I got for a like for like comparison.
I would not hold your breath on your friend finding paperwork, not just for an insurance renewal 16 years ago, but also showing what it would have been if he had not got a drink drive conviction. It would enable, though, a check to be made with that insurance company today to see how they would deal with a DR10.
There have been 5 references in your replies to insurance not increasing, or just increasing through inflation with a DR10 including:

"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 provide details of the insurance company that you used where the increase was only 'slight'? There have been several requests for you to help other drink drivers get better insurance, but nothing has been supplied.
I simply do not want people reading this thread to think that they need not worry so much about drink driving because there is no financial penalty when they go back on the road. There is, and for young drivers it can be considerable and indeed prohibitive.

 

[chiefmegawatty]

That will only help show if your claim that insurance did not go up 16 years ago was true.
to help people wanting insurance NOW, have you taken up my request to put your details into a comparison website to find out what happens to a drink driver today. I have quoted several sources that quote a 40 to 60% increase, and shown that when I put my own detail in for the renewal for my wife's car on comparethemarket.com that these are the figures that I got for a like for like comparison.
I would not hold your breath on your friend finding paperwork, not just for an insurance renewal 16 years ago, but also showing what it would have been if he had not got a drink drive conviction. It would enable, though, a check to be made with that insurance company today to see how they would deal with a DR10.
There have been 5 references in your replies to insurance not increasing, or just increasing through inflation with a DR10 including:

"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 provide details of the insurance company that you used where the increase was only 'slight'? There have been several requests for you to help other drink drivers get better insurance, but nothing has been supplied.
I simply do not want people reading this thread to think that they need not worry so much about drink driving because there is no financial penalty when they go back on the road. There is, and for young drivers it can be considerable and indeed prohibitive.

Sorry Boxer but despite me saying that I had the paperwork here from my insurance renewal back in 1988 I can't find it.
However, my friend who was disqualified in the late 1990's is certain that he can find his insurance renewal paperwork.
He is currently in Plymouth visiting his poorly mother but he has been monitoring this forum.
He intends to join this forum and start posting next week when he gets back from Plymouth.

Regarding applying for insurance quotes as an experiment I have discovered a snag.
You may remember that recently I applied for an insurance quote on an Aston Martin DB7.
I later discovered that this caused searches to be registered on my credit record even though I wasn't looking or applying
for credit. Searches registered on a credit reference agency are not good for your credit record.

My previous claim that my renewal insurance only increased slightly is the truth as I have no intention to mislead anybody.
My friend's claim that his reneweal didn't increase at all is also the truth.
Hopefully his expected posting next week will remove any doubt.

I am not disputing that nowadays insurance companies may vastly increase permiums for people with a DR10 endorsement.
The insurance companies are either trying to increase profits or they think the punishments for drink driving are ineffective.
Drink drive convictions have halved over the last 25 years so obviously the punishments are effective.
There are figures to prove that the drink drive awareness course vastly reduces re-offending as Mr Price has pointed out.
Therefore why should re-insuring go up now compared to 25 years ago?

 

[ukboxer]

Sorry Boxer but despite me saying that I had the paperwork here from my insurance renewal back in 1988 I can't find it.
However, my friend who was disqualified in the late 1990's is certain that he can find his insurance renewal paperwork.

So you stated I was wrong to say that insurance premiums drastically increase with a drink driving conviction because yours didnt 25 years ago?

Why would that be relevant to this thread in 2013?? Your posts have implied that no increase or only a slight increase is available NOW, hence why you were repeatedly asked by multiple members to reveal your insurance company, which you never did.

Your friends paperwork being from the late 1990's is also completely irrelevant so there is no need for him to find any paperwork unless his insurance company company offer no increase now in 2013. What will he prove if he finds it? That he had no increase in the 1990's? So what? We are not discussing historical insurance.

Whether you agree with it or not, it is a fact that premuims increase after a drink driving conviction.

This is why the advise is to downsize your car, take advantage of a rehabilitation course or anything else to reduce that cost as much as possible as shown here:

http://www.drinkdriving.org/drink_driving_car_insurance.php

Higher insurance is another consequence of drink driving but should also be looked at as a deterrent for not doing so.

 

[chiefmegawatty]

So you stated I was wrong to say that insurance premiums drastically increase with a drink driving conviction because yours didnt 25 years ago?

Why would that be relevant to this thread in 2013?? Your posts have implied that no increase or only a slight increase is available NOW, hence why you were repeatedly asked by multiple members to reveal your insurance company, which you never did.

Your friends paperwork being from the late 1990's is also completely irrelevant so there is no need for him to find any paperwork unless his insurance company company offer no increase now in 2013. What will he prove if he finds it? That he had no increase in the 1990's? So what? We are not discussing historical insurance.

Whether you agree with it or not, it is a fact that premuims increase after a drink driving conviction.

This is why the advise is to downsize your car, take advantage of a rehabilitation course or anything else to reduce that cost as much as possible as shown here:

http://www.drinkdriving.org/drink_driving_car_insurance.php

Higher insurance is another consequence of drink driving but should also be looked at as a deterrent for not doing so.

OK but why should insurance go up now when convictions and re-offences have gone down compared to 26 years ago.
Surely as the penalties are effective and vastly reducing the rate of offending compared to 26 years ago there is less need to increase insurance. I know from your previous postings that you don't agree that punishments should be directly proportional
to accident risk. I find that very strange if you are really interested in reducing death on the roads.

 

[ukboxer]

OK but why should insurance go up now when convictions and re-offences have gone down compared to 26 years ago.
Surely as the penalties are effective and vastly reducing the rate of offending compared to 26 years ago there is less need to increase insurance. I know from your previous postings that you don't agree that punishments should be directly proportional
to accident risk. I find that very strange if you are really interested in reducing death on the roads.

Just because the numbers have gone down why would there be less need to increase insurance for those who commit a drink driving offence? You dont really make any sense as the only people who incur an increase are those who commit a drink driving offence.

Im not quite sure what you mean by I dont agree punishments should be directly proportional as I have no problem with the current drink driving laws at all.

The penalties do not affect me either as I dont drink drive so I also have no problem personally with the penalties.

I think the topic of this thread has been fully answered now.

 

[chiefmegawatty]

Just because the numbers have gone down why would there be less need to increase insurance for those who commit a drink driving offence? You dont really make any sense as the only people who incur an increase are those who commit a drink driving offence.

Im not quite sure what you mean by I dont agree punishments should be directly proportional as I have no problem with the current drink driving laws at all.

The penalties do not affect me either as I dont drink drive so I also have no problem personally with the penalties.

I think the topic of this thread has been fully answered now.

I have looked back into the archives of this site from 2011 and 2012 and found many posters whose insurance has only
slightly increased or not increased at all due to a DR10 endorsement.
Maybe you should read through them to see how wrong you are.
My comments regarding increased risk of having an accident do make sense despite your inability to understand them.
Knowing that speeding kills more people than drink driving, then speeding should attract a greater punishment than drink
driving in order to reduce road deaths. Simple logic says that to reduce road deaths you attack the major cause with the
most serious punishment. In your previous posts you seem to oppose these smple obvious principles.
Published ROSPA/GOVERNMENT stats prove quite clearly that speeding kills far more people than drink driving.
That is what I mean by increased risk of having an accident. I hope that makes you understand what I am saying.
Increased risk is proved by accident statistics based on actual accidents rather than motorists who have been caught
with an increased risk of having an accident without actually having an accident.

 

[ukboxer]

I have looked back into the archives of this site from 2011 and 2012 and found many posters whose insurance has only
slightly increased or not increased at all due to a DR10 endorsement.
Maybe you should read through them to see how wrong you are.

Yet again I ask you... IF you can find an insurance company that offers only a slight increase or no increase at all after a drink driving conviction please post their details!!!

Please PROVE me wrong, I have no problem with that.

Simply stating I am wrong every post is of no use at all to anyone reading this thread.

 

[price1367]

I have also seen people claim that their insurance has not gone up, or hardly gone up. The person who started this thread stated that his insurance had gone down by hundreds of pounds after a DR10' but did later say that this did not happen for another car he has. He has also not posted sine being asked for the details of the insurance company involved for others to check. as I have said before, I would love to spread the good news about reduced insurance to the many drink drivers I help on my courses, but no one helps me.
I have shown many examples of insurance companies saying how much premiums increase after a drink drive conviction, and shown the example of my own quote through Comparethemarket.com, which showed a 40% + increase. These are all verifiable.
As Ukboxer says, where is the evidence that premiums do not increase substantially?
Can ANYONE publish a verifiable quote on here, like for like, showing a reduction or no increase or even a small rise "in line with inflation" ?

 

[chiefmegawatty]

I have also seen people claim that their insurance has not gone up, or hardly gone up. The person who started this thread stated that his insurance had gone down by hundreds of pounds after a DR10' but did later say that this did not happen for another car he has. He has also not posted sine being asked for the details of the insurance company involved for others to check. as I have said before, I would love to spread the good news about reduced insurance to the many drink drivers I help on my courses, but no one helps me.
I have shown many examples of insurance companies saying how much premiums increase after a drink drive conviction, and shown the example of my own quote through Comparethemarket.com, which showed a 40% + increase. These are all verifiable.
As Ukboxer says, where is the evidence that premiums do not increase substantially?
Can ANYONE publish a verifiable quote on here, like for like, showing a reduction or no increase or even a small rise "in line with inflation" ?

OK so when Hill House Hamond back in 1988 told me that a DR10 doesn't incerase insurance premiums by very much
because I had never cost them any money, you seem to be calling me a liar.
Please provide proof that I am a liar.
I distinctly remember them telling me that I wasn't classed as a huge insurance risk because many of their other customers had
been convicted of drink driving and never cost them a penny.
Please provide proof that I have cost my insurance company money as a proved insurance risk.
Not having an accident in nearly 40 years despite failing a breath test 26 years ago proves that I am a careful driver.
Sadly some members of this site seems to consider accident free drivers who fail breath tests to be inferior to drivers who have many accidents
who haven't even been drinking.

 

[ukboxer]

OK so when Hill House Hamond back in 1988 told me that a DR10 doesn't incerase insurance premiums by very much
because I had never cost them any money, you seem to be calling me a liar.
Please provide proof that I am a liar.

No one has said you are lying we are simply telling you that insurance after a drink driving conviction in the year 2013 substantially increases. That is a fact and a consequence of drink driving.

You can view the page from this very website here >> http://www.drinkdriving.org/drink_driving_car_insurance.php which deals with that issue.

Furthermore, the policies of insurance companies or brokers 25 years ago has absolutely no relevance nor offers any help to drivers with a drink driving conviction today.

 

[true]

The facts are, although your insurance is likely to rise between 40-60% in the first year if you have a drink drive conviction, it is still nowhere near the increase that someone would suffer if they were involved in an accident that was their fault, or had a fault claim against them. So even as a drink driver, your insurance will still be cheaper than someone who hasn't been convicted for drink driving or banned, but been involved in an incident resulting in their insurance company paying out. So it could be worse, you could have been in an accident that wasn't your fault and paying more! It also reduces significantly down each year so by the 4th year its the same as someone with no conviction.

My friends mum is 47, her car was taken by her other son, and crashed and written off, her insurance went up to about £900 a year, whereas her other son who had a DD conviction and was only 26 his insurance was about £600 a year for the same car.

 

[ukboxer]

The facts are, although your insurance is likely to rise between 40-60% in the first year if you have a drink drive conviction, it is still nowhere near the increase that someone would suffer if they were involved in an accident that was their fault, or had a fault claim against them. So even as a drink driver, your insurance will still be cheaper than someone who hasn't been convicted for drink driving or banned, but been involved in an incident resulting in their insurance company paying out. So it could be worse, you could have been in an accident that wasn't your fault and paying more! It also reduces significantly down each year so by the 4th year its the same as someone with no conviction.

My friends mum is 47, her car was taken by her other son, and crashed and written off, her insurance went up to about £900 a year, whereas her other son who had a DD conviction and was only 26 his insurance was about £600 a year for the same car.

As far as insurance companies go, ofcourse there are more serious convictions than drink driving but I doubt anyone here will be breathing a sigh of relief to know that their car insurance hasn't risen as much as someone who stole a car, crashed it and wrote it off!

Whilst there are numerous reasons as to why car insurance would increase it is largely irrelevant here if that reason does not involve drink driving.

The fact is a drink driving conviction will increase your car insurance for 5 years. I dont see how the increase would suddenly stop after 4 years as the conviction is disclosed for 5. Perhaps NCB explains a continued reduction but it will certainly be more than someone with a clean licence after the same timescale.

 

[true]

As far as insurance companies go, ofcourse there are more serious convictions than drink driving but I doubt anyone here will be breathing a sigh of relief to know that their car insurance hasn't risen as much as someone who stole a car, crashed it and wrote it off!

Whilst there are numerous reasons as to why car insurance would increase it is largely irrelevant here if that reason does not involve drink driving.

The fact is a drink driving conviction will increase your car insurance for 5 years. I dont see how the increase would suddenly stop after 4 years as the conviction is disclosed for 5. Perhaps NCB explains a continued reduction but it will certainly be more than someone with a clean licence after the same timescale.

Because you are only seen as a major risk for the first 2 years then after that the risk decreases significantly. It also depends on the breath reading etc, and if you have taken a course. Im just going by the fact that I used to work in the car insurance industry.

I was also pointing out that as much as some people on here like to rub their hands with glee implying that a drink drive conviction means years of exorbitant price rises on premiums - it doesn't. Yes your premiums will increase, but there are many other things that could raise your premiums way higher than a drink drive conviction.

 

[ukboxer]

Because you are only seen as a major risk for the first 2 years then after that the risk decreases significantly. It also depends on the breath reading etc, and if you have taken a course. Im just going by the fact that I used to work in the car insurance industry.

I was also pointing out that as much as some people on here like to rub their hands with glee implying that a drink drive conviction means years of exorbitant price rises on premiums - it doesn't. Yes your premiums will increase, but there are many other things that could raise your premiums way higher than a drink drive conviction.

Not sure where the 'rubbing of hands with glee' applies to giving the facts? I dont see anyone taking satisfaction in debunking the "Insurance is £700 cheaper with a DR10 conviction" subject. The OP made a mistake in their calculations and were simply told that.

Useful information is here http://www.drinkdriving.org/convicted_drivers_insurance.php

The many other things that could raise someones insurance are quite honestly irrelevant, who here cares?? Just seems a pointless exercise to inform people that it could be worse if they committed a different offence.

 

[AndyCabs]

I just passed my driving test on Monday and have purchased a car, a Seat Ibiza 1.4. My previous car was a MG ZR 1.4. I assume the Seat is in a lower Insurance bracket than the MG.

I was convicted for a 2nd time for DD in 2010 and then for driving whilst disqualified in 2012. My ban ended in December 2013.

I checked the price comparison website and the cheapest quote, which I accepted was for £348 - fully Comprehensive with the above convictions.

I checked with my previous insurance company and they stated I have 9 years no claims bonus, which is valid for a period of 3 years from the last insurance date ended. Without this the cheapest quote I got was £500 approx from the same company.

 

[price1367]

Andy cabs,
I would check with your new insurance company about how long they hold your NCB to be valid from your old company.
your old insurance company may say they recognise it for 3 years but most tend to only recognise it for 2 years, and some only 12 months.
the quotes you have seem very cheap, your first drink drive will have now dropped of the insurance declaration time of 5 years, so yoU had to declare one DR10, one drive whilst disqualified and one no insurance?
how much was it on the comparison website if you dropped the convictions altogether, I.e. For a clean licence?

 

[AndyCabs]

Price, I didn't check for a policy with a clean licence as I had to get insurance today as collecting the car tomorrow.

I assumed I didn't have any NCB's as I hadn't had insurance for 2 years but checked forums who said to contact the previous insurers which I did and they confirmed the 9 years NCB was still in effect.

I have paid the insurance and it has been accepted and collect the car tomorrow.

 

[price1367]

Enjoy the day tomorrow....!
My point was centred on what the new company make of no claims that is over 2 years old.
It matters not that your old insurance company would recognise it, because you do not have a policy with them.
i have recently changed insurance companies, for myself, my wife and my daughter, with 3 different companies. In each case, the new insurance company said they would have to see a renewal oFfer or something else with proof of the previous no claims, and they would then honour that no claims with them.... BUT it was providing the 'No claims 'proof' was from cover from within the past 2 years.
this is the detail on the aviva website:

The main driver will earn No Claim Discount (NCD) at renewal dependant on claims history. We define the main driver as the most frequent user and their NCD can only be used on one vehicle at any time. NCD from a previous insurer must have been earned within 2 years; we will not accept NCD earned as a named driver. Proof may be required.

Can i suggest that you contact you NEW insurance company in the morning to check that they will accept a proof of NCD that is over 2 years old. They are bound to want to see it in the next 7 to 14 days, they do not accept the drivers word for obvious reasons.
i have just read on another forum about someone sending in proof of NCD over 2 years old who was then charged a large cancellation fee.

 

[AndyCabs]

Price,

I completed another insurance quote without the convictions and the company I chose was £20pa cheaper and the second company was £50pa cheaper.

With regards to the NCD - I received the insurance documents today so will have a read to see what it says. I have been driving for 20+ years and have only ever had 1 minor accident and 1 speeding offence, just hope this continues.