BeMoto are good if that helps. Covered my 1199 Panigale and all of its mods for no extra charge. Highly recommended
After an initial scare over my renewal (due to the accident I mentioned in an earlier post and a recent incident in Belgium), I'm very happy to report that Ducati Insurance came through for me. Here's to a less 'eventful' year.
DI have been able to do it for me this year. Not quite the same policy as carol Nash last year but a bit cheaper. I have the 1299s and Street Triple R on a multi bike policy with them and for me, this year they were the most competitive. Very pleased with their service so far.
Waiting on confirmation that they can include riding other bikes but £270 for the Multistrada and the 1098R, fully comprehensive and protected NCB has got to be a steal. It's half the price of my Aviva renewal quote. Andy
I've got the hyper and the 1098R , just the one year NCB for £380 which is cheaper than the others I've tried.
DI put my renewal up this year by £400 because whilst I was sat in a line of traffic last year in my company car a tw@t in a BMW driving up the wrong side of the road decided to avoid a head on collision he was causing by driving into the side of my car.... now please tell me why that makes me a higher risk?!!!! Insurance companies make it all up!
You became an insurance claim statistic, that took no human involvement whatsoever and Underwriters (not insurance companies) have no interest in using a human element when agreeing to underwrite a statistic. Andy
Actually, every adjustment to my policy (for some reason) has to be done by hand with the underwriters. This means I have to wait 24hrs+, when DI can be bothered calling back, to find out how any change affects my premium. Ignoring that, with or without human involvement, me registering a no fault settled claim should not register me as a bigger risk...... even though I know that is exactly what they have twisted the statistics to justify! Why even bother asking if accidents are fault/non-fault if they still increase your risk just the same. They are all in collusion with these lies and answer to nobody.... just fleecing us left right and centre!
Insurers are interested in risk, and fault is only a part of that risk. For example if your vehicle is stolen, or is at risk of being stolen, there is no suggestion you are at fault or to blame in any way whatsoever; the risk exists and the insurer agrees to cover it, so if the risk is perceived to have become greater (e.g. because of more thefts in your area, or of your type of vehicle) so will the premium increase. Arguing that "I haven't done anything wrong", "It wasn't my fault", etc. is largely beside the point. Collisions may or may not involve any degree of blame, but even if you were in no way to blame for a particular event or events the risk of damage occurring may still have increased statistically.
My car wasn't stolen, and there was zero fault or blame (other than being on the road!) on my part, so it shouldn't at all be beside the point. I only statistically increased the risk by using the car.... and that is what the basic (non-bullcrap inflated) premium covers. I have heard all of their "you may travel in an area more at risk", and I'll point out I just moved and they already increased my premium by £400 for that. They also try to suggest "you may drive in a manner that makes you more likely to have an accident", and I'll point out they can look at my entire 25year driving history if they really want to check, that me sitting in traffic being sideswiped by a tw@t on the wrong side of the road is nothing to do with my driving, and that a similar incident of someone taking out my wing mirror 5 years ago has just been dropped from my record (so I've lost and gained 1 incident of being clipped by another driver from my 5 year history) so statistically I should be exactly the same risk as I was last year. They also argue that "having been in an accident you may now become a more nervous driver and drive in a manner that may get you in another accident".... please, don't make me laugh.... nervous because someone scraped my door in traffic.... if I were nervous, would I buy a 1299?!....
The problem is that motor insurance is a state-endorsed cartel, and not subject to market forces. The actuarial tables are used by underwriters to hoodwink "customers" - although I challenge the use of the term customer when what drives the industry is actually coercion. The stats that prove "increased risk" are no different in effect to the Bibles of the Middle Ages, written in Latin and understood only by those "in the know", the clergy/underwriters. In any other industry, price-fixing and market-sharing would be subject to anti-trust measures, as set out in legislation. But no, not motor insurance. It is a racket, pure and simple and should be dismantled and replaced by something that is a little more transparent, a little less gravy-train and above all, something that isn't monopolistic in its operation.
the quotes i was receiving appeared totally random: Ducati insurance came out the cheapest for me, it's still more than i wanted to pay at ~£440; I have 2 relatively high performance cars insured for £100 less combined, but seeing as i've only just passed my test (end of April) and I deem myself a liability, i think they probably should have charged me more. I pick the bike up this week M821 (with termi's declared to insurance) i think CN and bennetts were >£1k and all but MCE (~£600) on the comparison sites where >£700
update: so there was a bit of a delay getting the bike there is also a shortage of biketracs at the moment (supply issues rectified next week apparently).. Phoned Ducati insurance and they won't cover me for theft until it's fitted:taking the piss surely?!?
Could have insured my 2016 reg DVT (garaged) without biketrac plus my BMW RT (kept on drive) fully comp with protected N/C with DI for £189. But with euro breakdown and other bits and pieces £300.
But I'm already pissed off that I'll have to go through all this phoning and on line form filling again next year
