Insurance quotes for Australian M3?

[Hungry Mile]

(Mod, sorry this should be in another thread!)

Ordered 4th Sep but I have been reservation holder since Apr 2016

Ahh, you ordered a full month ahead of me. Damn...

Also said LR AWDs won't be here until at least December.

That's unfortunate but at least I'm no longer holding my breath as I was told I would have an October delivery.

To get back to the thread topic, what is going on with these insurers? I think I may get a quote for a similarly priced European car to see what happens there.

 

[Hungry Mile]

I think I may get a quote for a similarly priced European car to see what happens there.

Ok, NRMA will charge me less than $1100 for a similarly priced Mercedes C 300 Coupé. Compared to over $1800 for the LR AWD.
Methinks we may need to do some lobbying! That's quite a premium, 63% extra to insure the M3.

 

[Hungry Mile]

Reading the thread Where do the written off Teslas go in Aus?, starting from post #118 I suddenly realise why insurance cost is that much greater... a combination of factors including parts availability, nervousness by Tesla, repairers and insurers about potential damage to battery cells. All this translates to higher insurance cost.
That's the bleeding edge for us!

 

[Vostok]

I’m now on this insurance quote merry-go-round ahead of getting my Model 3 next month. And like others’ experience here, the quotes are all over the place. I’m in Sydney, have a good driving record/no claims bonus and car will be garaged.

Quotes are based on $95k agreed value. So far APIA have given the best quote (my age bracket now revealed ) of $1680 including one excess-free windscreen/glass claim per year, and had the lowest excess of $645. The next best were GIO ($1890, with $1245 excess that was the lowest they would offer) and Budget Direct ($1980, $950 excess). At the other end of the scale were Youi ($2450, $900 excess), NRMA ($3110, despite getting 20% discount for other policies I have with them), Qantas ($3220) and QBE ($3240). Allianz would not offer insurance for this car.

Of course the quotes depend on so many variables about you and where you live etc but I’ve never seen such a wide range and it makes me wonder if the actuaries are using a dart board.

 

[meowsers]

$977 RACV P3D+ with 2000 excess and excess free glass

 

[PJF000]

For anyone getting insurance on a new car, if you hold back on upgrades then purchase them afterwards (e.g. FSD) you will not be covered for those items in the case of a loss unless you notify the insurance co. when you get the upgrades.

 

[Hungry Mile]

$977 RACV P3D+ with 2000 excess and excess free glass

Showoff!
Unfortunately, RACV won't insure us northerners. Discrimination, I say.

 

[meowsers]

For anyone getting insurance on a new car, if you hold back on upgrades then purchase them afterwards (e.g. FSD) you will not be covered for those items in the case of a loss unless you notify the insurance co. when you get the upgrades.

This doesn’t apply to RACV luckily. They don’t care about options. Those who don’t get FSD effectively subsidise those who do.

 

[Bleach888]

Insured SR+ today with NRMA. $1098 with $1000 excess. Including windscreen glass (all glass actually), MKT value, new for old for 2 years.
Male 67, no incidents.

The Problem with aami is you cannot choose ur repairers, must go through their repair centres

 

[Hungry Mile]

Insured SR+ today with NRMA. $1098 with $1000 excess. Including windscreen glass (all glass actually), MKT value, new for old for 2 years.
Male 67, no incidents.

NRMA ($3110)

Just nuts, this sort of discrepancy.

 

[Vostok]

Just nuts, this sort of discrepancy.

My quote was for LR AWD with $95k ‘agreed value’ so that would increase the premium compared to SR+. But yeah, the variations are hard to explain.

 

[Hungry Mile]

My quote was for LR AWD with $95k ‘agreed value’

Yes, mine too. However I was quoted $1574 for market value (I figure that is ok for 1st year), $2000 excess, and hire car and windscreen options.
Maybe your neighbourhood...?

 

[HappyPEJ]

Most policies have new for old replacement for the first two years so Market Vs Agreed value seems, on the surface, to make no difference in what you get. So, if there is a difference in price, seems sensible to go with the cheapest option.

On the topic of excess... I'm thinking of going for the largest excess I can find. From what I can see across all the insurers I have checked (Most of the ones discussed here) after three years of no "at fault claims", you are ahead of the game. The savings on premiums cover the higher excess. When I look at my driving history, I have have had many years of no claims so it seems to make sense to go for the higher excess.

Appreciate others' thoughts. Am I missing something?

 

[PJF000]

Market v agreed value, can be huge difference. Even new for old - read the PDS!
Level of excess depends on how "insured" you want to be and how much pain you are willing to bear. If you trust yourself and can bear lots of pain, you could always just take 3rd party property.

 

[Vostok]

If you trust yourself and can bear lots of pain, you could always just take 3rd party property.

But that really sucks if an uninsured driver totals your car. Taking them to court to recover damages is hardly a great option (assuming they don’t escape the scene without you getting their details).

 

[HappyPEJ]

Market v agreed value, can be huge difference. Even new for old - read the PDS!
Level of excess depends on how "insured" you want to be and how much pain you are willing to bear. If you trust yourself and can bear lots of pain, you could always just take 3rd party property.

Noice! Although in this case you would need decades of no claims before you can afford a claim and still be ahead.
The three year rule seems to be independent of the excess level you choose on full comp insurance.
So, it does come down to how confident you are of going the 3 years. (And if you can afford the $2k excess in case of an accident.)

Thanks for the tip on the new for old and market v agreed value. I'll do some more reading.

 

[PJF000]

after three years of no "at fault claims", you are ahead of the game.

If you get behind the game, (get paid out numerous times where your risk to the insurer becomes untenable for them) you will find it hard or impossible to get insurance at all.
When determining your level of excess (if available) there is usually a sweet spot where you get maximum bang for your buck when making a claim.

But that really sucks if an uninsured driver totals your car

Very true and even if they are drunk or on drugs. However, it is rarer than not. Touch wood, it has never happened to me, nor have I totalled an uninsured car.

 

[Hungry Mile]

Most policies have new for old replacement for the first two years so Market Vs Agreed value seems, on the surface, to make no difference in what you get

My M3 LR AWD is invoiced for around $95k yet the quotes talk about a market value of $85k. Does anyone understand why that may be?

 

[Vostok]

My M3 LR AWD is invoiced for around $95k yet the quotes talk about a market value of $85k. Does anyone understand why that may be?

The insurer uses the difference to buy shares in TSLA?

 

[Vostok]

Most policies have new for old replacement for the first two years so Market Vs Agreed value seems, on the surface, to make no difference in what you get. So, if there is a difference in price, seems sensible to go with the cheapest option.

That seems a fair point - careful reading of the PDS required. My only concern would be, once the “new for old” period runs out, you may wish to switch back to “agreed” value if your insurer is nominating a desultory market value for your car. But I don’t know if you are allowed to do that, or by how much you’d be allowed to increase the value.

When we first insured our LEAF we had the opposite problem. We bought it new for $40k but insurers still had the original price of $55k in their systems. Our “market” value was substantially higher than what we paid for it!