Nine years no claims bonus

I am not sure what ‘up to 9 years no claims bonus’ means for the motorist, as advertised by Zurich Insurance.

Certainly it sounds like Zurich wants to cream off the least risk motorists over 25 (more women than men I’d calculate) who are the least likely to use their motor insurance claims service… but what do foxy lady drivers get as a result?

LV= advertises up to 75% NCB which is a more meaningful promise for female motorists but is the Zurich offer even better?

And can you protect it? I certainly would recommend it if the NCB is as significant as it should be/probably is.

Or are they positioning themselves to be seen to offer better value for customers with RBS insurance brands?

FOXY Steph

A better car insurance deal for women?

If you controlled a third of the UK’s private motor insurance market, including a significant portfolio of policies held by better risk women drivers, and this market was predicted to grow by £6bn by 2012, would you choose to sell car insurance brands that are so well known by female motorists? I’m talking about big brands like Direct Line, Churchill and NIG.

That’s the situation the Royal Bank of Scotland is in with the likes of Zurich, AIG and Generali competing for any motor insurance business spoils.

With the marketing job done in terms of brand awareness and so many potential economies of scale to be gained in servicing this business I can’t help thinking that size and status quo is a critical financial advantage for the Bank to leverage. Perhaps we’ll see some brands peeling off instead but surely not the majority unless things are much worse than we realise…

At least this exercise will allow it to put a value on its brands and review ways to make it more competitive in future. Which will be a good thing for female motorists, either way, I’m sure.

Anyone up for a bet?

FOXY Steph

www.foxyladydrivers.com

Car insurance vs car sales best practice

I read in today’s Insurance Times that the FSA is concerned about insurance brokers failing to disclose financial relationships with insurers. Apparently this is having an adverse impact on consumers, as you might expect.

For example, broker A could receive contingent commissions from insurer B if he placed a certain amount of business with it, thus making him more likely to place that business with that insurer, whether or not it was in the client’s best interests.

The FSA is looking at forcing brokers to make a full disclosure of all commissions to put the spotlight on potential conflicts of interest.

Keep going FSA and perhaps the same open and accountable business values might enter the car showroom arena. Too many women motorists feel vulnerable here and I think it is appalling that there is clearly one price for those that don’t haggle but a lower one for those in the know.

Only a matter of time before ‘fair for all’ becomes a regulated selling norm, surely?

Poor bank

In a valiant attempt to create a new and increasingly topical oxymoron I can find no sympathy whatsoever for ‘poor’ banks like the Royal Bank of Scotland. Yes I think it’s fair that their shareholders are expected to contribute towards the lean after so much fat but when the share price instantly rises due to financial speculation it looks like a pretty safe bet to me.

My interest is in how this affects their car insurance brands and the knock on effect for women drivers.

The wise companies, I’m thinking about the likes of LV= here, were ahead of the game, despite catching a financial cold. No more credit cards post 2006 and no new loans in 2007.

How come they could see what was coming yet Northern Rock and RBS presumably couldn’t.

Let’s see how Barclays fares later this week…

FOXY Steph