You generally get a better value premium on a high risk car because it's a different set of specialised under-writers. An insurance company that offers a good deal on a performance car is very unlikely to offer the same value on a rep-mobile, and vice versa. Use a broker or do some ringing around. Going to the same insurer for wildly different specified cars will get expensive quickly.
Aye, at the time i swapped providers and got a much better deal.
No its not.
The insurance industry works on data. if it were random then people would also get very very cheap premiums on Ferrari's etc.
The reason for the increase in the OP would have been down to statistics. More accidents would have happened in the diesel variant than the petrol one.
The diesel version may have been more popular with reps etc and would have been involved in more claims
Some insurance companies update their data daily. So quotes can change overnight.
Its all about risk management. If blue fiestas are involved in more accidents then the insurance renewal's on blue fiesta's will increase.
Really! A couple of years ago at work they had a test drive event where they allow us to drive different vehicles in the Ford range. One after the other I drove a Fiesta, B-Max, Kuga, Transit Custom Van and a Transit Custom minibus. There was no need to get used to them, I felt immediately at home in each one and very easy to drive.
It's not about quibbly little differences like this - or it wouldn't be if you made an effort. The insurance company will raise the premium because they know the public are lazy and won't ring around for deals. Most customers would rather moan on TP/FB than search out a deal. Unless it's discretionary/luxury spending (like a camera), then we're all over the web researching how to save a pound.
There is a big difference between driving different cars around a race track and driving different vehicles on the road.
I've used the same broker for about 20 years. He used to be local, but over the years I've moved a couple of times and now he's about 3 hours away. But he has all my details on file so there's not much need for a face-to-face these days. It started when I needed insurance for an extended trip to Europe as a student, using a broker saved the insurance premium tax that at the time travel agents had to add - it was the travel agent sent me to the broker saying they couldn't hope to beat what he'd offer. Then when I bought my first car I tried the direct insurers (comparison sites weren't around then) and then rang the same broker, and he was substantially cheaper. Since then he's insured every car I've owned (except the TR6), done the house and contents, and does the same for almost all of my immediate family (all of whom live at least twice as far from the broker as I do). I've periodically done a ring around for comparison, but have never beaten his price by anything substantial. I've made a couple of claims over the years and the other advantage of a broker is that they deal with the hassle for you. Whenever I've thought about changing car I've always rung him first and got a quote before I make an offer on the car. He can turn around an offer in less than an hour and all I have to tell him is make/model and registration because he already has all my details on file (and he'll have two or three quotes for comparison).
You are talking of two different statistics though. 18yr old novice drivers are more likely to have an accident, hence high premiums, makes sense. The colour of a car is inconsequential though, it's just a random statistic that doesn't need to be applied. As I said before one colour has to be at the top of the number involved in an accident. It doesn't mean they are more likely to be involved in an accident, their is nothing in the colour of the car that would make it a risk. The only time a colour may have a bearing on premium is if it's a special pearlescent colour which is difficult to match and blend in, meaning the car would require a total respray.
All the cars may have been same period and same manufacturer but at the time I was driving a 5yr old Mondeo, ok same manufacturer but not the same period from mine to what were brand new cars. First time I drove a Transit, I was a little apprehensive as it was my mates and brand new, After reversing out of a parking space in a car park, I realised how easy it was to drive. If you are driving at the sort of speeds that any car is likely to end up in a ditch, maybe you shouldn't be driving on the road.
The reason they want more for you being in a non fault accident is because they have a statistic that shows you are most likely to be involved in another accident within 12months, the statistic decreases each year, which is why some ask if you've been involved in an accident in the last 3-5yrs even if non fault.
If one car is likely to end up in a ditch if you are only doing 20mph, I'd say the conditions are that bad, most cars would.
