Fully comp vs third party fire and theft

[Jaff.]

Right I have a mk1 megane worth roughly £1500-£2000 if I'm lucky with a 2.0 16v turbo engine in it (previously 1.6 16v) so its obviously had a lot of money spent on it, and I've just been getting quotes to insure it.

Whilst talking to sky insurance the guy on the phone suggested I go for TPFT over FC so I went along with it and got a quote for TPFT.

My question is am I gaining anything by getting this cover over FC?

Things were said about having the car written off in an accident and having to pay money to get it back etc. something that wouldn't happen with TPFT

Can anyone shed some light?

 

[MT AUDIO]

your car aint covered to be fixed if you crash into someone then, for the cost its saves its not worth it

 

[Jaff.]

No I know that but iv done all the work on my car myself, so minus a paint job in a minor accident I won't benefit from FC, or will I?

 

[TheEvilGiraffe]

Third Party, Fire & Theft covers exactly that.. i.e.: not you.

If someone slams into you, you're claiming off them. If you slam into someone else, they claim off you but you won't see a penny for your car as only the third party (them wot you hit ) are covered for loss.

I hope that makes sense.

A lot of advice suggests FC is actually cheaper these days... get a quote for both from the same company as a comparison.

Always remember to check the excesses too

 

[BoatNonce]

Just stay FC. It's cover worth having rather than third party which isn't really.

EDIT: I paid less for FC than third party.

 

[.Kev.]

TPFT for poor people.

As above, you'll be left with nothing if you smash it.

 

[Jaff.]

But according to the guy on the phone of I smash it then the insurance company own it if it's a write off I get hardly anything because the cars true value is not a lot and if u want the car back I have to buy it back. Whereas if it was tpft I can just take it home and fix it, or if I've done a proper job of it then strip and scrap it

 

[.Kev.]

Surely the car's yours. If you except the pay out after a smash being FC then the cars is theirs and they sell it for salvage ect. TPFT the car's yours they pay out for the 3rd party your left with what ever's left of your car.

 

[Jaff.]

This is my confusion. I've always insured FC but thinking about how little my car is actually worth minus all the work Ive done to it I'm beginning to think I'm wasting my money (if it is more expensive for FC)

 

[Knuckles]

The way I see it, If a cars worth less than £2k and you have an accident, insurance will most likely write it off. So it's up to you whether you want to have it written off and have the price of a 1.6 meg payed back to you or whether you wanna go TPFT and fix/salvage it yourself

 

[Jaff.]

That's the thing I don't want, the insurance determining its a write off because I cracked a bumper.

If it was tpft I just get a new bumper spray it up and it's job done, if it was FC I'd get it written off have to get it vic checked etc and come the time I may sell it it's worth jack, althought I'm more likely to strip it than sell it

 

[Ricardos]

Can you add things like legal protection, breakdown recovery to a TPFT policy? It's not only having the crash with someone else it's the potential injuries incurred in the accident?

There's obviously going to be benefits to having a FC policy over TPFT, i've seen TPFT qoutes on certain cars more than FC

 

[Jaff.]

I'm not sure tbh, I struggled to understand the guy speaking so fast in a foreign accent (English ha)

Something I should look into

 

[Jaff.]

got a quote off brentacre today FC £1800, so i know its a poor comparison but FC is more expensive

 

[theduck]

What you seem to be missing is when you crash fully comp that you get paid out the value of the car before the crash and that is in effect the insurance company buying the car off you. You can then buy back the wreck for the value of the car in the wrecked state, so you end up basically with a smaller pay out AND the car. This would be exactly the same if a third party hit you and you claimed off their insurance and the car was written off and you only had TPFT.

Brentacre recommended I went TPFT on the Puma, but I insisted I wanted fully comp, even though it was £100 more, the guy asked why, and I simply told him that I'd have to have the Puma for 15 years and not write it off to recoup the savings of fully comp vs TPFT and that didnt seem like a good deal.

 

[st3ve]

Go TPFT, the guy on the phone is speaking sense.

 

[Jaff.]

i understand that but with the car worth about £1500 roughly then thats all i would get paid should i wreck it. now in the grand scheme of things thats pennys compared to what ive spent on it so its obviously not gonna be much of a help and then id have to buy the car back to sell bits off it to get some money back.

what im trying to establish is what benefits there are to going FC over TPFT with a car thats worth a hell of a lot more to me than the insurers. as its been said if its FC a small bump would write it off when i could probably quite easily fix a small bump whereas if im TPFT i just crack on and fix it whilst the insurers sort out the TP. or would they still wriote my car off?

evrything im worried about here is if it comes to me being at fault of course. if someone hits me then their insurance covers it and its just the way it goes then

 

[theduck]

Ok, so FC, you have a small bump and its written off. Insurers pay out £1500. You want the car back, they reduce your payout to £1000 and give you the car. You spend less than £1000 getting it legal again and are quids in.

 

[TheEvilGiraffe]

Sound like you need a specialist insurer with an agreed value, not Meerkat one-for-all insurance.

 

[Chesh]

Id go tpft. The car is worth so little that I wouldnt want to claim on my own insurance purely because of how much the insurance rises after you make a claim.

 

[Jaff.]

Ok, so FC, you have a small bump and its written off. Insurers pay out £1500. You want the car back, they reduce your payout to £1000 and give you the car. You spend less than £1000 getting it legal again and are quids in.

yes but i them also have a catD/catC on my hands...

so far ive had sky and brentacre quotes, not even been on a comparison site as i fear i would be completley wasting my time

 

[Clouder]

What you are looking for is FC with agreed value... ask them about it

 

[Dan@M.A.D]

Fully comp is cheaper for me, Insurance seems to have dropped massively over xmas for me, It's gone from £2500 to insure a clio to £2000 and from £2700 to insure an a3 to £1800 !! Happy days

 

[daveski]

Sound like you need a specialist insurer with an agreed value, not Meerkat one-for-all insurance.

This tbh mate. With all the work I dont think normal insurance will be enough

 

[Jaff.]

Will I pay more for an agreed value policy tho?

 

[Alastair.]

i only go fully comp if the car is worth more than 2k. My insurance is more if i choose 3rd party ft for some reason.

 

[Jaff.]

well i just got a FC quote from AF thats for my car thats worth £5k. for £1560. wich is £100 cheaper than sky offered me for TPFT

might give sky a ring and see what sort of prices they have if i ammend a few details

 

[wezzel98765]

EVERY quote I've ever done has come out MORE on TPFT than FC!

I'm talking hundreds more

 

[Jaff.]

looks like it might be worth ringing sky back up then