Re: OT Car insurance rise?

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 17:56:45 -0000, Commander Kinsey <C...@nospam.com> wrote:

> I just looked at my elderly neighbour's car insurance renewal, and they tried to raise the price from £260 to £315, I'll have a word with them anyway, and need to remove his deceased wife from it, but when I checked on a comparison site, the cheapest elsewhere was £450! WTF's going on?

I just checked by adding his wife back on with a comparison site, it seems single people pay more than married people. I'll see if he wants to "forget" to tell them she died. The price rise is about £65 for having one less driver, which is insane. Do they think widowed people become reckless on the road? Apparently this was challenged in most US states, but the UK is still using it.

["\"Re...@home.com]

In 2007 In Colorado my wife passed at age 60. So I called car insurance
to take her off policy. I did not expect the rate would go down by half,
but I certainly did not expect it to go up !!! And the amount was not
trivial. The insurer was a well-known national outfit we had been with
40 years, with no claims.

So I called my agent, and he either could not, or would not, explain why
the increase. All he wanted to do was jigger with the coverages to get
the rate back down.

So I contacted about 4 competitors, and got a rate even lower than the
old rate, with another well-known national outfit.

[Peeler]

On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 13:55:01 -0500, "Retarded, another mentally challenged,
troll-feeding, senile asshole, bullshitted again:

> In 2007 In Colorado my wife passed at age 60.

WTF has this shit got to do with ANY of the 3 ngs you crossposted it to, you
troll-feeding senile ASSHOLE?

[Commander Kinsey]

My neighbour's already on the lowest one. I put him on it last year, way cheaper than anyone else. I hope he doesn't insist on telling them she's no longer driving it. If he wants to be honest, he could put his other next door neighbour's wife on it, just in ca se she wants to use it. Women are safer drivers apparently ROTFPMSL! And how can MORE drivers in a car be safer?

[Rod Speed]

Commander Kinsey <C...@nospam.com> wrote
> <Retired"@home.com> wrote
>> Commander Kinsey wrote

Or make fewer insurance claims, anyway.

> And how can MORE drivers in a car be safer?

Because car is driven by the driver who makes fewer claims part of the
time, stupid.

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 07:20:31 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the two subnormal sociopathic cretins' endless absolutely idiotic
blather>

--
Typical retarded "conversation" between the Scottish wanker and the senile
Ozzietard:

Birdbrain: "Horse shit doesn't stink."

Senile Rodent: "It does if you roll in it."

Birdbrain: "I've never worked out why, I assumed it was maybe meateaters
that made stinky shit, but then why does vegetarian human shit stink? Is it
just the fact that we're capable of digesting meat?"

Senile Rodent: "Nope, some cow shit stinks too."

Message-ID: <fv5f1t...@mid.individual.net>

[Commander Kinsey]

Less you posh twat.

> insurance claims, anyway.

Women pay for damage themselves?!

>> And how can MORE drivers in a car be safer?
>
> Because car is driven by the driver who makes fewer claims part of the
> time, stupid.

That's the stupid conclusion insurers maybe come to. But in reality the car will be used more. The woman will drive it to places that she wouldn't have gone to otherwise.

If man and wife are always together, they won't share the driving, he'll always drive.

[Rod Speed]

Commander Kinsey <C...@nospam.com> wrote

Nope, don't have as many accidents they claim on the insurance for.

>>> And how can MORE drivers in a car be safer?
>>
>> Because car is driven by the driver who makes fewer claims part of the
>> time, stupid.
>
> That's the stupid conclusion insurers maybe come to.

They would be using their stats, stupid.

Very unlikely that even a woke insurance company
would have stupid women setting the premiums
and choosing to have lower premiums when a woman
is listed as one of the drivers.

> But in reality the car will be used more.

Bullshit.

> The woman will drive it to places that she wouldn't have gone to
> otherwise.

More bullshit.

> If man and wife are always together, theywon't share the driving, he'll
> always drive.

More bullshit.

She may well drive when he isn't able to for whatever
reason, like being over the limit alcohol wise.

And in that case, clearly less risk for the insurance company, stupid.

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 08:29:21 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent

Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the two subnormal sociopathic cretins' endless absolutely idiotic
blather>

--

Another typical retarded conversation between our two village idiots,
Birdbrain and Rodent Speed:

Birdbrain: "You beat me to it. Plain sex is boring."

Senile Rodent: "Then fuck the cats. That wont be boring."

Birdbrain: "Sell me a de-clawing tool first."

Senile Rodent: "Wont help with the teeth."

Birdbrain: "They've never gone for me with their mouths."

Rodent Speed: "They will if you are stupid enough to try fucking them."

Birdbrain: "No, they always use claws."

Rodent Speed: "They wont if you try fucking them. Try it and see."

Message-ID: <g3cjf7...@mid.individual.net>

[Commander Kinsey]

An accident without a claim means they paid themselves.

>>>> And how can MORE drivers in a car be safer?
>>>
>>> Because car is driven by the driver who makes fewer claims part of the
>>> time, stupid.
>>
>> That's the stupid conclusion insurers maybe come to.
>
> They would be using their stats, stupid.
>
> Very unlikely that even a woke insurance company
> would have stupid women setting the premiums
> and choosing to have lower premiums when a woman
> is listed as one of the drivers.
>
>> But in reality the car will be used more.
>
> Bullshit.
>
>> The woman will drive it to places that she wouldn't have gone to
>> otherwise.
>
> More bullshit.
>
>> If man and wife are always together, theywon't share the driving, he'll
>> always drive.
>
> More bullshit.
>
> She may well drive when he isn't able to for whatever
> reason, like being over the limit alcohol wise.
>
> And in that case, clearly less risk for the insurance company, stupid.

No, because he would have got a taxi.

Anyway, another poster said it doesn't have to be a relation. Consider I lived next door to you and didn't have a car. You nicely said I could borrow yours whenever you're not using it, and put me on your insurance. Your car will clearly be used for exactly the times you used it before, plus some more for me, yet your premium somehow went down?!

[alan_m]

As I'm getting older and possibly above some insurance age threshold my
premiums are creeping up, even using comparison sites. What I've found
adjusting the excess that I will pay can reduce the premium by the
almost the same amount.

UK Legislation changed this year. Insurance companies can no longer
offer discounts to new customers if they don't offer the same discount
to existing customers. However, This doesn't mean that they have to
offer the same premium to a 50 year old and a 70 year old :(


--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

[Rod Speed]

Nope, much more likely that the other party in the accident's insurance
paid.

>>>>> And how can MORE drivers in a car be safer?
>>>>
>>>> Because car is driven by the driver who makes fewer claims part of the
>>>> time, stupid.
>>>
>>> That's the stupid conclusion insurers maybe come to.
>>
>> They would be using their stats, stupid.
>>
>> Very unlikely that even a woke insurance company
>> would have stupid women setting the premiums
>> and choosing to have lower premiums when a woman
>> is listed as one of the drivers.
>>
>>> But in reality the car will be used more.
>>
>> Bullshit.
>>
>>> The woman will drive it to places that she wouldn't have gone to
>>> otherwise.
>>
>> More bullshit.
>>
>>> If man and wife are always together, theywon't share the driving, he'll
>>> always drive.
>>
>> More bullshit.
>>
>> She may well drive when he isn't able to for whatever
>> reason, like being over the limit alcohol wise.
>>
>> And in that case, clearly less risk for the insurance company, stupid.
>
> No, because he would have got a taxi.

More of your mindless bullshit. Plenty go by car with
the woman driving the car home after the pissup.

> Anyway, another poster said it doesn't have to be a relation. Consider
> I lived next door to you and didn't have a car. You nicely said I could
> borrow yours whenever you're not using it, and put me on your
> insurance. Your car will clearly be used for exactly the times you used
> it before, plus some more for me, yet your premium somehow went down?!

That is much less common than the woman driving the car when the
man is over the legal limit.

[Peeler]

On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 22:11:20 +0000, anal_m, the notorious troll-feeding
senile retard, blathered again:

> As I'm getting older

You can possibly get older, but you can't possibly get yet more senile, you
troll-feeding senile moron!

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 09:19:42 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent

Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the two subnormal sociopathic cretins' endless absolutely idiotic
blather>

--

Another typical retarded "conversation" between Birdbrain and senile Rodent:

Senile Rodent: " Did you ever dig a hole to bury your own shit?"

Birdbrain: "I do if there's no flush toilet around."

Senile Rodent: "Yeah, I prefer camping like that, off by myself with
no dunnys around and have always buried the shit."

MID: <fv66ka...@mid.individual.net>

[rbowman]

I've got a car, a pickup, and three motorcycles each with separate
policy. I tried to explain I could only drive one at a time but it was
no go. At least I get a multi-vehicle discount.

[Bob F]

My state recently announced that insurance prices can not be reduced if
you have a good credit rating. So our insurance went up due to that.

[Commander Kinsey]

There's a few companies in the UK that do multi car policies, but not many. Most are either single car or fleet (as in 30 at least).

You can also get insurance that allows you to drive other cars. But they usually have some weird rule that the other car must be owned and insured by someone else - WTF? Why would it need insurance twice?

[rbowman]

I think my policy covers other vehicles but I'm not sure. The last time
I drove somebody's car was when a hang glider pilot asked me if I'd
drive his truck down to the trailhead for him. The road up the mountain
is gated and I'd walked up it many times but never drove on it. It was
interesting to say the least. One section is steep enough that the trail
switchbacks several times rather than follow the road.

[Peeler]

On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 18:38:29 -0700, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


> I've got a car

You've got your thick senile head WAY up the unwashed Scottish troll's and
wanker's arse again, gossip girl! <BG>

--
Yet more absolutely idiotic senile blather by lowbrowwoman:
"I save my fries quota for one of the local food trucks that offers
poutine every now and then. If you're going for a coronary might as well
do it right."
MID: <ivdi4g...@mid.individual.net>

[Peeler]

On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 21:05:31 -0700, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,

troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:

> I think

You BRAG and you BULLSHIT endlessly, you idiotic senile BIGMOUTH from the
US!

--
Gossiping "lowbrowwoman" about herself:
"Usenet is my blog... I don't give a damn if anyone ever reads my posts
but they are useful in marshaling [sic] my thoughts."
MID: <iteioi...@mid.individual.net>

[Peter Keller]

On 23/01/22 08:47, Peeler wrote:
> WTF has this shit got to do with ANY of the 3 ngs you crossposted it to, you
> troll-feeding senile ASSHOLE?

Peeler's slime exudate is released via holocrine secretion in which
entire cells are ejected from the glands.

[Peter Keller]

On 23/01/22 09:37, Peeler wrote:

>
> <FLUSH the two subnormal sociopathic cretins' endless absolutely idiotic
> blather>
>

Although Peeler's plasma is isosmotic to SW, there are ionic
differences, most notably greater Na+ but lesser Cl−, Mg2+, and SO42−
concentrations.

[Peter Keller]

On 23/01/22 10:54, Peeler wrote:
> <FLUSH the two subnormal sociopathic cretins' endless absolutely idiotic
> blather>

The mechanisms maintaining these ionic gradients are largely unknown,
although the copious slime production by Peeler may be an excretory
pathway for at least the divalent ions.

[Peter Keller]

On 23/01/22 11:51, Peeler wrote:
> <FLUSH the two subnormal sociopathic cretins' endless absolutely idiotic
> blather>

The slightly greater plasma Na+, and lesser Cl− concentration may be
secondary to the presence of gill Na+/H+ and Cl−/HCO3− exchangers used
in net acid secretion for acid–base regulation or because of the charge
distribution secondary to plasma organics or excretion of unwanted
divalent ions (e.g., Ca2+ or Mg2+), but these propositions are largely
untested.

[Peter Keller]

On 23/01/22 21:52, Peeler wrote:
> You BRAG and you BULLSHIT endlessly, you idiotic senile BIGMOUTH from the
> US!

Peeler feeds in a complex and very different way compared with other
organisms.

[Peter Keller]

On 23/01/22 21:50, Peeler wrote:
> You've got your thick senile head WAY up the unwashed Scottish troll's and
> wanker's arse again, gossip girl! <BG>

Peeler's feeding system includes posteriorly directed keratinous teeth
that are attached to dental plates, a paired series of cartilages.

[Peter Keller]

On 23/01/22 11:50, Peeler wrote:
> You can possibly get older, but you can't possibly get yet more senile, you
> troll-feeding senile moron!

Peeler's dental plates are moved in and out of the mouth during feeding
via retractor and protractor muscles.

[Brian Gaff (Sofa)]

You could be uninsured if you lie on an insurance declaration.
I guess you could add yourself to it just in case he needs you to pick him
up from somewhere, say an eye examination and takes you in his car and then
has drops in the eyes.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Commander Kinsey" <C...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:op.1gesr...@ryzen.lan...

[Chris Green]

Commander Kinsey <C...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> You can also get insurance that allows you to drive other cars. But they
> usually have some weird rule that the other car must be owned and insured
> by someone else - WTF? Why would it need insurance twice?

Many (most?) policies in the UK provide this cover.

I think the requirement "that the other car must be owned and insured
by someone" is to allow the police (and others) to check that a car is
insured. I.e. given the registration number it's quick and simple for
an automatic check to see if it's insured. If a 'driver' was insured
then there's no way to check if any particular car on the road has
insurance.

Way back (in the late 60s or early 70s) I had one insurance cover note
which referred to one particular car but then added "any car owned by
the insurer". It was rather handy when the insurance on my other car
had expired (simple forgetfulness) and I was stopped by the police
and had to show insurance within 5 days. Police station where I
showed it was quite happy with the 'any car' cover note.

--
Chris Green
·

[Chris Green]

I'm 75 now and still have a (big) 'bike as well as cars. So far the
'bike insurance has remained pretty steady. I have passed the three
yearly medical so I can keep my 7.5 tonne and trailer entitlements but
I'm not sure if insurers bother to look at such things.

--
Chris Green
·

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 22:09:44 +1300, Peter Keller, the dumb gay masochistic
little cyclist, blabbered again:

> Peeler's slime exudate is released via holocrine secretion in which
> entire cells are ejected from the glands.

Ever more useless sick nonsense by the resident useless gay cyclist! LOL

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 22:11:16 +1300, Peter Keller, the dumb gay masochistic
little cyclist, blabbered again:

> Although Peeler's plasma is isosmotic to SW, there are ionic
> differences, most notably greater Na+ but lesser Cl−, Mg2+, and SO42−
> concentrations.

Nothing but useless idiotic sick shit by the resident idiotic gay little
cyclist! LOL

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 22:13:23 +1300, Peter Keller, the dumb gay masochistic
little cyclist, blabbered again:

> The mechanisms maintaining these ionic gradients are largely unknown,
> although the copious slime production by Peeler may be an excretory
> pathway for at least the divalent ions.

Poor retarded useless gay little cyclist! LOL

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 22:14:23 +1300, Peter Keller, the dumb gay masochistic
little cyclist, blabbered again:

> The slightly greater plasma Na+, and lesser Cl− concentration may be
> secondary to the presence of gill Na+/H+ and Cl−/HCO3− exchangers used
> in net acid secretion for acid–base regulation or because of the charge
> distribution secondary to plasma organics or excretion of unwanted
> divalent ions (e.g., Ca2+ or Mg2+), but these propositions are largely
> untested.

Another presentation of the resident gay little cyclist's invincible idiocy!
LOL

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 22:16:03 +1300, Peter Keller, the dumb gay masochistic
little cyclist, blabbered again:

> Peeler feeds in a complex and very different way compared with other
> organisms.

You competently present what a poor sick idiot you are, you filthy gay
little cyclist! <BG>

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 09:18:16 +0000, Chris Green, the mentally deficient,
notorious, troll-feeding, senile idiot, blathered again:

> Many (most?) policies in the UK provide this cover.
>
> I think the requirement

I think that NONE of this shit belongs in ANY of the three ngs you
crossposted it to, you idiotic troll-feeding senile twit! <tsk>

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 22:17:11 +1300, Peter Keller, the dumb gay masochistic
little cyclist, blabbered again:

>> You've got your thick senile head WAY up the unwashed Scottish troll's and
>> wanker's arse again, gossip girl! <BG>
>
> Peeler's feeding system includes posteriorly directed keratinous teeth
> that are attached to dental plates, a paired series of cartilages.

Your IDIOCY keeps showing, you ridiculous idiotic gay little cyclist! <BG>

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 22:18:02 +1300, Peter Keller, the dumb gay masochistic
little cyclist, blabbered again:

>> You can possibly get older, but you can't possibly get yet more senile, you
>> troll-feeding senile moron!
>
> Peeler's dental plates are moved in and out of the mouth during feeding
> via retractor and protractor muscles.

LOL More of the usual useless senile shit by the resident gay cyclist!

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 09:23:20 -0000, Brainless & Daft, the notorious,
troll-feeding senile idiot, blathered again:

> You could be uninsured if you lie on an insurance declaration.
> I guess you could add yourself to it just in case he needs you to pick him
> up from somewhere, say an eye examination and takes you in his car and then
> has drops in the eyes.

> Brainless & Daft

Yep, YOU were still missing on the long list of troll-feeding senile
assholes in this thread, you disgusting blind mole! Where have you been so
long, cretin?

[Peter Johnson]

On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 20:02:02 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
<C...@nospam.com> wrote:


>
> Women are safer drivers apparently ROTFPMSL! And how can MORE drivers in a car be safer?

When I was trying to negotiate a downwards renewal a couple of years
ago, and noticed that I allegedly had access to more than one car I
asked for that to be removed because it shouldn't have been on, but
the price went up, eSure telling me that I would be a better risk if I
had access to more than one vehicle.

[angelica...@yahoo.com]

On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 4:07:36 PM UTC-5, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 20:20:31 -0000, Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Commander Kinsey <C...@nospam.com> wrote
> >> <Retired"@home.com> wrote
> >>> Commander Kinsey wrote

> >>>> Commander Kinsey <C...@nospam.com> wrote
> >
> >>>>> I just looked at my elderly neighbour's car insurance renewal, and
> >>>>> they tried to raise the price from £260 to £315, I'll have a word
> >>>>> with them anyway, and need to remove his deceased wife from it, but
> >>>>> when I checked on a comparison site, the cheapest elsewhere was
> >>>>> £450! WTF's going on?
> >>>>
> >>>> I just checked by adding his wife back on with a comparison site, it
> >>>> seems single people pay more than married people. I'll see if he
> >>>> wants to "forget" to tell them she died. The price rise is about £65
> >>>> for having one less driver, which is insane. Do they think widowed
> >>>> people become reckless on the road? Apparently this was challenged in
> >>>> most US states, but the UK is still using it.
> >>>

> >>> In 2007 In Colorado my wife passed at age 60. So I called car insurance
> >>> to take her off policy. I did not expect the rate would go down by half,
> >>> but I certainly did not expect it to go up !!! And the amount was not
> >>> trivial. The insurer was a well-known national outfit we had been with
> >>> 40 years, with no claims.
> >>>
> >>> So I called my agent, and he either could not, or would not, explain why
> >>> the increase. All he wanted to do was jigger with the coverages to get
> >>> the rate back down.
> >>>
> >>> So I contacted about 4 competitors, and got a rate even lower than the
> >>> old rate, with another well-known national outfit.
> >>
> >> My neighbour's already on the lowest one. I put him on it last year,
> >> way cheaper than anyone else. I hope he doesn't insist on telling them
> >> she's no longer driving it. If he wants to be honest, he could put his
> >> other next door neighbour's wife on it, just in ca se she wants to use
> >> it.
> >

> >> Women are safer drivers apparently ROTFPMSL!
> >

> > Or make fewer
> Less you posh twat.
>
> > insurance claims, anyway.
>
> Women pay for damage themselves?!

> >> And how can MORE drivers in a car be safer?
> >

> > Because car is driven by the driver who makes fewer claims part of the
> > time, stupid.
> That's the stupid conclusion insurers maybe come to. But in reality the car will be used more. The woman will drive it to places that she wouldn't have gone to otherwise.
>
> If man and wife are always together, they won't share the driving, he'll always drive.

I always drive when we're together.

I've made zero insurance claims. My husband has made one or two in the
past 35 years.

Cindy Hamilton

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 11:07:04 +0000, Peter Johnson, another mentally
challenged, troll-feeding, senile asshole, blathered:

> When I was trying to negotiate a downwards renewal a couple of years
> ago, and noticed that I allegedly had access to more than one car

WTF has your shit got to do with ANY of the three ngs you crossposted it to,
you troll-feeding senile asshole?

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 05:04:21 -0800 (PST), Windy Hamilton, the absolutely
brain dead, notorious, troll-feeding, senile Yankie cunt, blathered again:

> I always drive when we're together.
>
> I've made zero insurance claims. My husband has made one or two in the
> past 35 years.
>

> Windy Hamilton

Does your pitiable "hubby" (in case he exists) know about your idiotic
troll-feeding on Usenet, you disgusting senile Yankietard?

[JNugent]

During the 1970s, I had several years of policies (and certificates)
which simply purported to cover any car I owned and did not mention any
specific vehicle at all. The reason was that the cert then didn't need
to be returned for amendment on a change of car.

ISTR that this was discontinued, and a registration mark compulsorily
included, in the latter part of the decade, possibly due to a change in
the law.

[rbowman]

The insurance on my bikes is nominal, a little over $100 / year for
each. Motorcycle insurance is not required in this state which may keep
them honest.

My first bike was a '55 FLH when I was 18. I called up the family
insurance man to inquire about a policy. He asked what the displacement
was and I said 74. When he asked 'cc's' I should have kept my mouth shut.

[Clare Snyder]

Common fleet or "standard garage" policy

[Clare Snyder]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 11:07:04 +0000, Peter Johnson

"More vehicles than drivers" generally reduces cost per vehicle - and
depending on the vehicles CAN reduce overall cost.
Here in Ontario the vehicle is insured based on the record/rating of
the primary driver, with any secondary driver possibly affecting the
rate. For instance if the primary driver has a 5 star rating and the
secondary driver only has a 3 star rating the premium may be $1400 a
year. Take iff the secondary driver and it may drop to $1200, but
removing the primary driver and putting the secondary driver on as
primary could raise the premium to $1800. Putting the 5 star driver
back on as secondary would be unlikely to have any appreciable effect.

[alan_m]

On 23/01/2022 04:05, rbowman wrote:

> I think my policy covers other vehicles but I'm not sure.

Is it fully comprehensive for the "other" vehicle or just third party?

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

[Chris Green]

Mine's (I'm the 75 year old just up there) is not much more, just over
£100 for a pretty new Yamaha FJR1300.

--
Chris Green
·

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 10:39:08 -0700, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:

> The insurance on my bikes is nominal, a little over $100 / year for

That's SOOO interesting again, gossip girl! Just like everything about you
is always so VERY interesting! And that's the very reason why you keep
telling us everything about yourself, right, you gorgeous bigmouth? <VBG>

--
Gossiping "lowbrowwoman" about herself:
"Usenet is my blog... I don't give a damn if anyone ever reads my posts
but they are useful in marshaling [sic] my thoughts."
MID: <iteioi...@mid.individual.net>

[rbowman]

The V-Strom, DR650, and Sportster are all slightly different but are in
the same range. I don't know what magic they use to determine the
premium. The V-Strom has the most bodywork and that may be a factor.
I've never had a claim on a bike so I don't know how that works.

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 13:22:59 -0700, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,

troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:

> The V-Strom, DR650, and Sportster are all slightly different but are in

They still are all off-topic senile shit, you abnormal senile blabbermouth!

--
Yet more of the very interesting senile blather by lowbrowwoman:
"My family loaded me into a '51 Chevy and drove from NY to Seattle and
back in '52. I'm alive. The Chevy had a painted steel dashboard with two
little hand prints worn down to the primer because I liked to stand up
and lean on it to see where we were going."
MID: <j2kuc1...@mid.individual.net>

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 19:12:11 -0000, Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 18:00:42 +0000, Robin wrote:
>
>> On 23/01/2022 17:07, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>> On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 16:57:49 +0000, JNugent wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 23/01/2022 04:39 pm, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 15:53:50 +0000, JNugent wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 23/01/2022 03:46 pm, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 12:59:14 +0000, Spike wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 23/01/2022 10:30, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (drifting OT) Since gender can no longer be used as a marker for
>>>>>>>>> actuaries, how come marital status can ? Aren't both protected
>>>>>>>>> characteristics for the purposes of law ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So is age...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does insurance vary that much with age ? The main reason 17 year
>>>>>>> olds are quoted eye watering prices is more because they have zero
>>>>>>> demonstrable miles under their belt.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So why would a newly-qualified 30-yr-old be able to get cheaper
>>>>>> quotes?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The answer is that teenagers are actuarially more likely ("less
>>>>>> unlikely" if you prefer) to be involved in expensive accidents.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Obviously experience is a proxy for age. However I notice (with
>>>>>>> more interest) there has been a quiet campaign to remove such
>>>>>>> markers from places where discrimination is actionable. Like job
>>>>>>> adverts for example.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there a law on age discrimination?
>>>>>
>>>>> Age is a protected characteristic. As much as sex.
>>>>
>>>> Protected by means of what?
>>>
>>> 2010 Equality Act in the UK.
>>
>> "Protected" does not mean "thou shalt not have any regard to".
>
> Oh I know :)
>
>> And the
>> Act (as amended) *explicitly* allows discrimination by age for financial
>> services where objectively justified. That includes for insurance
>> purposes on the basis of evidence that old farts (<waves>) are greater
>> risks.
>
> But mysteriously stops at sex :)

Are you saying insurance for a similarly experienced male and female driver must cost the same?

> I got quite a bit of work out of the gender ruling ...

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 17:31:20 -0000, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:

> So what does it say?
>
> Ten-year-olds allowed to drive HGVs?
>
> Something else?

They should be allowed to if they're capable. Obviously most couldn't pass the test.

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 07:16:00 -0000, mm0fmf <no...@invalid.com> wrote:

> On 22/01/2022 22:11, alan_m wrote:
>> On 22/01/2022 18:10, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>> On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 17:56:45 -0000, Commander Kinsey <C...@nospam.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I just looked at my elderly neighbour's car insurance renewal, and
>>>> they tried to raise the price from £260 to £315, I'll have a word
>>>> with them anyway, and need to remove his deceased wife from it, but
>>>> when I checked on a comparison site, the cheapest elsewhere was
>>>> £450! WTF's going on?
>>>
>>> I just checked by adding his wife back on with a comparison site, it
>>> seems single people pay more than married people. I'll see if he
>>> wants to "forget" to tell them she died. The price rise is about £65
>>> for having one less driver, which is insane. Do they think widowed
>>> people become reckless on the road? Apparently this was challenged in
>>> most US states, but the UK is still using it.
>>
>> As I'm getting older and possibly above some insurance age threshold my
>> premiums are creeping up, even using comparison sites. What I've found
>> adjusting the excess that I will pay can reduce the premium by the
>> almost the same amount.
>>
>> UK Legislation changed this year. Insurance companies can no longer
>> offer discounts to new customers if they don't offer the same discount
>> to existing customers. However, This doesn't mean that they have to
>> offer the same premium to a 50 year old and a 70 year old :(
>

> Premium is based on risk profile. Insurance companies exist to make a
> profit therefore are quite aware of risk profile. You'll find they have
> evidence to suggest single drivers are more of a risk than married ones.

That's the trouble, they think like robots. In my neighbour's case, he was married a couple of months ago, how has he become a more dangerous driver since his wife died?

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 02:10:48 -0000, Bob F <bobn...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 1/22/2022 2:11 PM, alan_m wrote:
>> On 22/01/2022 18:10, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>> On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 17:56:45 -0000, Commander Kinsey <C...@nospam.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I just looked at my elderly neighbour's car insurance renewal, and
>>>> they tried to raise the price from £260 to £315, I'll have a word
>>>> with them anyway, and need to remove his deceased wife from it, but
>>>> when I checked on a comparison site, the cheapest elsewhere was
>>>> £450! WTF's going on?
>>>
>>> I just checked by adding his wife back on with a comparison site, it
>>> seems single people pay more than married people. I'll see if he
>>> wants to "forget" to tell them she died. The price rise is about £65
>>> for having one less driver, which is insane. Do they think widowed
>>> people become reckless on the road? Apparently this was challenged in
>>> most US states, but the UK is still using it.
>>
>> As I'm getting older and possibly above some insurance age threshold my
>> premiums are creeping up, even using comparison sites. What I've found
>> adjusting the excess that I will pay can reduce the premium by the
>> almost the same amount.
>>
>> UK Legislation changed this year. Insurance companies can no longer
>> offer discounts to new customers if they don't offer the same discount
>> to existing customers. However, This doesn't mean that they have to
>> offer the same premium to a 50 year old and a 70 year old :(
>

> My state recently announced that insurance prices can not be reduced if
> you have a good credit rating. So our insurance went up due to that.

So if you defaulted on a credit card, you'd get cheaper insurance? WTF?

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 22:11:20 -0000, alan_m <ju...@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

> On 22/01/2022 18:10, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 17:56:45 -0000, Commander Kinsey <C...@nospam.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I just looked at my elderly neighbour's car insurance renewal, and
>>> they tried to raise the price from £260 to £315, I'll have a word with
>>> them anyway, and need to remove his deceased wife from it, but when I
>>> checked on a comparison site, the cheapest elsewhere was £450! WTF's
>>> going on?
>>
>> I just checked by adding his wife back on with a comparison site, it
>> seems single people pay more than married people. I'll see if he wants
>> to "forget" to tell them she died. The price rise is about £65 for
>> having one less driver, which is insane. Do they think widowed people
>> become reckless on the road? Apparently this was challenged in most US
>> states, but the UK is still using it.
>
> As I'm getting older and possibly above some insurance age threshold my
> premiums are creeping up, even using comparison sites. What I've found
> adjusting the excess that I will pay can reduce the premium by the
> almost the same amount.
>
> UK Legislation changed this year. Insurance companies can no longer
> offer discounts to new customers if they don't offer the same discount
> to existing customers. However, This doesn't mean that they have to
> offer the same premium to a 50 year old and a 70 year old :(

I'm 46 and pay under £200 a year for my car insurance.

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 19:12:48 -0000, Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 18:54:02 +0000, mm0fmf wrote:
>
>> On 23/01/2022 10:30, Jethro_uk wrote:

>>> On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 07:16:00 +0000, mm0fmf wrote:

>>>> Premium is based on risk profile. Insurance companies exist to make a
>>>> profit therefore are quite aware of risk profile. You'll find they
>>>> have evidence to suggest single drivers are more of a risk than
>>>> married ones.
>>>

>>> (drifting OT) Since gender can no longer be used as a marker for
>>> actuaries, how come marital status can ? Aren't both protected
>>> characteristics for the purposes of law ?
>>>

>> Who says married people are of different genders?
>
> Gender is not a protected characteristic.

Sexuality is.

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 09:21:42 -0000, Chris Green <c...@isbd.net> wrote:

> alan_m <ju...@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 22/01/2022 18:10, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> > On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 17:56:45 -0000, Commander Kinsey <C...@nospam.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> I just looked at my elderly neighbour's car insurance renewal, and
>> >> they tried to raise the price from £260 to £315, I'll have a word with
>> >> them anyway, and need to remove his deceased wife from it, but when I
>> >> checked on a comparison site, the cheapest elsewhere was £450! WTF's
>> >> going on?
>> >
>> > I just checked by adding his wife back on with a comparison site, it
>> > seems single people pay more than married people. I'll see if he wants
>> > to "forget" to tell them she died. The price rise is about £65 for
>> > having one less driver, which is insane. Do they think widowed people
>> > become reckless on the road? Apparently this was challenged in most US
>> > states, but the UK is still using it.
>>
>> As I'm getting older and possibly above some insurance age threshold my
>> premiums are creeping up, even using comparison sites. What I've found
>> adjusting the excess that I will pay can reduce the premium by the
>> almost the same amount.
>>
>> UK Legislation changed this year. Insurance companies can no longer
>> offer discounts to new customers if they don't offer the same discount
>> to existing customers. However, This doesn't mean that they have to
>> offer the same premium to a 50 year old and a 70 year old :(
>>

> I'm 75 now and still have a (big) 'bike as well as cars. So far the
> 'bike insurance has remained pretty steady. I have passed the three
> yearly medical so I can keep my 7.5 tonne and trailer entitlements but
> I'm not sure if insurers bother to look at such things.

They don't check much at all. I've made several er.... "white lies" and they've never called me on them, even after an at-fault accident.

[Commander Kinsey]

What measurement where you using? Oh, USA, something from 300 years ago. Cubic microfurlongs?

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 18:24:46 -0000, alan_m <ju...@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

> On 23/01/2022 04:05, rbowman wrote:
>
>> I think my policy covers other vehicles but I'm not sure.
>
> Is it fully comprehensive for the "other" vehicle or just third party?

In the UK it's usually 3rd party, but stupidly requires the other car and owner to have insurance.

It's not a thing I bother checking. The police don't either. One asked me if I had business insurance when using my car for work, I said no, he said tut tut they won't like that.

I've towed my neighbour's trailer with the wrong reg number on the back, and no lights. A woman yelled at me when I stopped "without indicating". I said "I did indicate". She said "Your trailer didn't". I said "It's not my trailer". She couldn't think of a further reply.

[Commander Kinsey]

In the UK I see garages putting a temporary reg number in the window when they use that. The law is beyond a joke.

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 09:18:16 -0000, Chris Green <c...@isbd.net> wrote:

> Commander Kinsey <C...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>> You can also get insurance that allows you to drive other cars. But they
>> usually have some weird rule that the other car must be owned and insured
>> by someone else - WTF? Why would it need insurance twice?
>
> Many (most?) policies in the UK provide this cover.

Mine usually doesn't, not that I bother abiding by the law anyway.

I think it's because I usually have third party, although sometimes comprehensive is cheaper, which just goes to show the insurance companies don't have a fucking clue.

[Commander Kinsey]

I lie all the time and they've never refused to pay up or got annoyed with me.

And your suggestion is technically lying but unprovable.

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 09:23:20 -0000, Brian Gaff (Sofa) <bri...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

> You could be uninsured if you lie on an insurance declaration.
> I guess you could add yourself to it just in case he needs you to pick him
> up from somewhere, say an eye examination and takes you in his car and then
> has drops in the eyes.

> Brian

[Commander Kinsey]

But I'm a man, I assume it dropped for him because his wife was a woman.

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 10:28:17 -0000, Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 20:00:11 +0000, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 18:36:07 -0000, charles <cha...@candehope.me.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> [quoted text muted]
>>
>> Yip, I just fiddled with different options,
>
> Repeatedly adjusted quotes are a marker for fraud at the backend.

Bullshit. I'm just someone seeing what affects the quote and whether I should put other people on it etc.

And they're too thick to monitor things like that.

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 11:07:04 -0000, Peter Johnson <pe...@parksidewood.nospam> wrote:

> On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 20:02:02 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
> <C...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Women are safer drivers apparently ROTFPMSL! And how can MORE drivers in a car be safer?
>
> When I was trying to negotiate a downwards renewal a couple of years
> ago, and noticed that I allegedly had access to more than one car I
> asked for that to be removed because it shouldn't have been on, but
> the price went up, eSure telling me that I would be a better risk if I
> had access to more than one vehicle.

Doh!

[Commander Kinsey]

Which is why you always have the primary drive as a safe one. 40 year old man with 17 year old son for example. In reality the man never drives the car.

[Fredxx]

Yes.

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 22:07:20 +0000, Fredxx, the notorious, troll-feeding,
senile smartass, blathered again:


> Yes.

What a fucked up miserable troll-feeding senile ASSHOLE you are!

[rbowman]

It may be scaled on the car's value and what is a 20 year old Renault worth?

[rbowman]

https://www.smartcycleguide.com/L51240067

Except for the Sportsters, Harley doesn't do cc's.


https://www.harley-davidson.com/us/en/motorcycles/street-bob.html

That ain't 114 cc's... My lawnmower has more than 74 cc's ffs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LR69HKPp30A

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 13:04:21 -0000, angelica...@yahoo.com <angelica...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 4:07:36 PM UTC-5, Commander Kinsey wrote:

>> On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 20:20:31 -0000, Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Commander Kinsey <C...@nospam.com> wrote

>> >> <Retired"@home.com> wrote
>> >>> Commander Kinsey wrote

>> >>>> Commander Kinsey <C...@nospam.com> wrote
>> >
>> >>>>> I just looked at my elderly neighbour's car insurance renewal, and
>> >>>>> they tried to raise the price from £260 to £315, I'll have a word
>> >>>>> with them anyway, and need to remove his deceased wife from it, but
>> >>>>> when I checked on a comparison site, the cheapest elsewhere was
>> >>>>> £450! WTF's going on?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I just checked by adding his wife back on with a comparison site, it
>> >>>> seems single people pay more than married people. I'll see if he
>> >>>> wants to "forget" to tell them she died. The price rise is about £65
>> >>>> for having one less driver, which is insane. Do they think widowed
>> >>>> people become reckless on the road? Apparently this was challenged in
>> >>>> most US states, but the UK is still using it.
>> >>>

>> >>> In 2007 In Colorado my wife passed at age 60. So I called car insurance
>> >>> to take her off policy. I did not expect the rate would go down by half,
>> >>> but I certainly did not expect it to go up !!! And the amount was not
>> >>> trivial. The insurer was a well-known national outfit we had been with
>> >>> 40 years, with no claims.
>> >>>
>> >>> So I called my agent, and he either could not, or would not, explain why
>> >>> the increase. All he wanted to do was jigger with the coverages to get
>> >>> the rate back down.
>> >>>
>> >>> So I contacted about 4 competitors, and got a rate even lower than the
>> >>> old rate, with another well-known national outfit.
>> >>
>> >> My neighbour's already on the lowest one. I put him on it last year,
>> >> way cheaper than anyone else. I hope he doesn't insist on telling them
>> >> she's no longer driving it. If he wants to be honest, he could put his
>> >> other next door neighbour's wife on it, just in ca se she wants to use
>> >> it.

>> >
>> >> Women are safer drivers apparently ROTFPMSL!
>> >

>> > Or make fewer
>> Less you posh twat.
>>
>> > insurance claims, anyway.
>>
>> Women pay for damage themselves?!

>> >> And how can MORE drivers in a car be safer?
>> >

>> > Because car is driven by the driver who makes fewer claims part of the
>> > time, stupid.
>> That's the stupid conclusion insurers maybe come to. But in reality the car will be used more. The woman will drive it to places that she wouldn't have gone to otherwise.
>>
>> If man and wife are always together, they won't share the driving, he'll always drive.
>
> I always drive when we're together.
>
> I've made zero insurance claims. My husband has made one or two in the
> past 35 years.

Neither my neighbour or his wife have ever made a claim in their 50 years of driving. But then they do drive like Miss Daisy.

Now here comes the weird part. I've actually found a way to make his insurance cheaper without any kind of lying whatsoever. Put me on his insurance as a named driver, it's perfectly feasible - I might need to give him a lift to the dentist, doctor etc when he's not up to driving, but my car is out of action. What on earth? I'm not a woman. I do have a clean record like she did. Maybe it's because I'm younger. Nope, put my dad on it and it's still cheaper. Why is it cheaper to have more people insured for a car, regardless of age or sex?

[Commander Kinsey]

Illogical, since presumably one of them is less likely to make claims.

[Rod Speed]

Commander Kinsey <C...@nospam.com> wrote
> angelica...@yahoo.com <angelica...@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Commander Kinsey wrote

Likely because it is less likely that the only driver will choose to drive
when pissed.

[Commander Kinsey]

$15,000!!! You could get a car for that!

> https://www.harley-davidson.com/us/en/motorcycles/street-bob.html
>
> That ain't 114 cc's... My lawnmower has more than 74 cc's ffs.

What is it 114 of then?

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LR69HKPp30A

[Commander Kinsey]

Under what circumstances would I drive his car if he was pissed?

And isn't insurance null and void if you're drunk?

Why do we say null and void? One of those words on it's own would do.

[Commander Kinsey]

Nothing they do makes sense. If I choose third party, the value of the car should be irrelevant, as it's only what I crash into that matters.

> and what is a 20 year old Renault worth?

£500 5 years ago, but I've replaced every single part including the engine.

[Rod Speed]

Commander Kinsey <C...@nospam.com> wrote

When decide to share a car so one of you can get pissed and
the other not get pissed so they are still legal to drive home.

Better than the one who gets pissed driving its own car home pissed.

> And isn't insurance null and void if you're drunk?

Thats why the one who drives you both home isnt drunk, stupid.

> Why do we say null and void? One of those words on it's own would do.

Then why didnt you do that ?

[alan_m]

On 23/01/2022 17:39, rbowman wrote:

>
> The insurance on my bikes is nominal, a little over $100 / year for
> each. Motorcycle insurance is not required in this state which may keep
> them honest.

Without insurance, who pays when you run someone over, it's your fault,
and the resulting lifelong medical bills come to millions?

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

[alan_m]

On 24/01/2022 02:38, Commander Kinsey wrote:

>
> Nothing they do makes sense.  If I choose third party, the value of the
> car should be irrelevant, as it's only what I crash into that matters.

It's often recommended that you insure your car comprehensively rather
than just for third party (fire and theft) even if the car is worth
little because it can reduce your premium.

Often just describing your job in a different way (without lying) can
change the premium.

[Rod Speed]

alan_m <ju...@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote

> Commander Kinsey wrote

>> Nothing they do makes sense. If I choose third party, the value of the
>> car should be irrelevant, as it's only what I crash into that matters.
>
> It's often recommended that you insure your car comprehensively rather
> than just for third party (fire and theft) even if the car is worth
> little because it can reduce your premium.

That's mad given that more is covered.

[Peter Keller]

On 23/01/22 23:13, Peeler wrote:
> I think that NONE of this shit belongs in ANY of the three ngs you
> crossposted it to, you idiotic troll-feeding senile twit! <tsk>


Despite the fact that Peeler seems repulsive, he is undoubtedly
unique—and just because Peeler is disgusting to human sensibilities
doesn’t mean he doesn't deserve our attention and protection.

[Peter Keller]

On 24/01/22 03:56, Peeler wrote:
> WTF has your shit got to do with ANY of the three ngs you crossposted it to,
> you troll-feeding senile asshole?

Although he is jawless, Peeler two rows of tooth-like structures made
of keratin that he uses to burrow deep into carcasses.

[Peter Keller]

On 24/01/22 09:32, Peeler wrote:
> They still are all off-topic senile shit, you abnormal senile blabbermouth!

While eating carrion or live prey, Peeler ties his tail into knots to
generate torque and increase the force of his bites.

[Peter Keller]

On 24/01/22 08:07, Peeler wrote:
> That's SOOO interesting again, gossip girl! Just like everything about you
> is always so VERY interesting! And that's the very reason why you keep
> telling us everything about yourself, right, you gorgeous bigmouth? <VBG>

No one is sure whether Peeler belongs to his own group of animals,
filling the gap between invertebrates and vertebrates, or if he is more
closely related to vertebrates.

[Peter Keller]

On 23/01/22 23:17, Peeler wrote:

>
> Yep, YOU were still missing on the long list of troll-feeding senile
> assholes in this thread, you disgusting blind mole! Where have you been so
> long, cretin?

To ward off predators and other fish trying to steal his meal, Peeler
produces slime.

[Peeler]

On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 21:17:12 +1300, Peter Keller, the dumb gay masochistic
little cyclist, blabbered again:

MORE of the typical idiotic gay shit by the resident gay masochistic little
cyclist! LOL

[Peeler]

On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 21:21:23 +1300, Peter Keller, the dumb gay masochistic
little cyclist, blabbered again:

> Although he is jawless, Peeler two rows of tooth-like structures made
> of keratin that he uses to burrow deep into carcasses.

More of the typical idiotic sick shit by the idiotic sick resident gay
little cyclist! LOL

[Peeler]

On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 21:22:48 +1300, Peter Keller, the dumb gay masochistic
little cyclist, blabbered again:

>> They still are all off-topic senile shit, you abnormal senile blabbermouth!
>
> While eating carrion or live prey, Peeler ties his tail into knots to
> generate torque and increase the force of his bites.

[Peeler]

On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 21:24:32 +1300, Peter Keller, the dumb gay masochistic
little cyclist, blabbered again:

More of the typical ridiculous sick shit by the ridiculous idiotic sick

[Peeler]

On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 21:26:15 +1300, Peter Keller, the dumb gay masochistic
little cyclist, blabbered again:

>> Yep, YOU were still missing on the long list of troll-feeding senile
>> assholes in this thread, you disgusting blind mole! Where have you been so
>> long, cretin?
>
> To ward off predators and other fish trying to steal his meal, Peeler
> produces slime.

More of the absolutely idiotic sick shit by the resident gay little cyclist!
LOL

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 18:46:59 -0700, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:

> https://www.smartcycleguide.com/L51240067
>
> Except for the Sportsters, Harley doesn't do cc's.
>
> https://www.harley-davidson.com/us/en/motorcycles/street-bob.html
>
> That ain't 114 cc's... My lawnmower has more than 74 cc's ffs.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LR69HKPp30A

Good grief, you senile bigmouth! Do you really have NOBODY in your old
people's home to talk to? I mean, everything you say about yourself is
always so super super "interesting"! <BG>

There SHOULD be someone around for you in real life who would listen to your
gorgeous self, especially as you KEEP claiming you are still holding down a
job! Yeah, sure! LMAO

--
More typical idiotic senile gossip by lowbrowwoman:
"It's been years since I've been in a fast food burger joint but I used
to like Wendy's because they had a salad bar and baked potatoes."
MID: <ivdi4g...@mid.individual.net>

[Peeler]

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 18:22:25 -0700, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,

troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


>

> It may be scaled on the car's value and what is a 20 year old Renault worth?

WTF has this entirely off topic idiotic blather got to do with ANY of the
three ngs you keep crossposting it to, you abnormal senile BRAGGART and
BIGMOUTH?

--
Gossiping "lowbrowwoman" about herself:
"Usenet is my blog... I don't give a damn if anyone ever reads my posts
but they are useful in marshaling [sic] my thoughts."
MID: <iteioi...@mid.individual.net>

[Peeler]

On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 07:13:22 +0000, anal_m, the notorious troll-feeding
senile retard, blathered again:

> It's often recommended that you insure your car comprehensively rather

It's ALWAYS recommended that you NOT feed the troll, anal_m, you typical
troll-feeding senile shithead!

[Peeler]

On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 18:33:55 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin's latest trollshit unread>

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 87-year-old senile Australian
cretin's pathological trolling:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/rod-speed-faq.2973853/

[Peeler]

On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 13:01:08 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent

Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the two subnormal sociopathic cretins' endless absolutely idiotic
blather>

--
Typical retarded "conversation" between the Scottish wanker and the senile
Ozzietard:

Birdbrain: "Horse shit doesn't stink."

Senile Rodent: "It does if you roll in it."

Birdbrain: "I've never worked out why, I assumed it was maybe meateaters
that made stinky shit, but then why does vegetarian human shit stink? Is it
just the fact that we're capable of digesting meat?"

Senile Rodent: "Nope, some cow shit stinks too."

Message-ID: <fv5f1t...@mid.individual.net>

[Peeler]

On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 14:15:53 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent

Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the two subnormal sociopathic cretins' endless absolutely idiotic
blather>

--

Typical "conversation" between sociopathic wanker Birdbrain and the
sociopathic senile Ozzietard:

Birdbrain: "So why did you mention hairy legs?

Senile Ozzietard: "Because that's what those who arent actually
stupid enough to shave their legs have."

MID: <fugb22...@mid.individual.net>

[Fredxx]

But entirely logical if we want rid of sex discrimination. It just means
that occupations that are male oriented or those out of work pay higher
premiums.

[Fredxx]

On 24/01/2022 07:33, Rod Speed wrote:
> alan_m <ju...@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote
>> Commander Kinsey wrote
>
>>> Nothing they do makes sense.  If I choose third party, the value of
>>> the car should be irrelevant, as it's only what I crash into that
>>> matters.
>>
>> It's often recommended that you insure your car comprehensively rather
>> than just for third party (fire and theft) even if the car is worth
>> little because it can reduce your premium.
>
> That's mad given that more is covered.

I guess it's all down to the person who would choose to go third party only.