Why is fully comprehensive cover sometimes cheaper than third-party only cover?
While third-party policies used to be the cheapest option for car insurance, that’s no longer the always case.
In a nutshell, drivers with riskier profiles tend to opt for third-party policies to save money. A young driver without any years of no claims bonus faces exorbitant car insurance premiums, and historically one way to keep down your quote was to opt for a lower level of cover. It’s not just young drivers: any risky driver will, by default, face higher premiums and be looking to cut down their insurance bill. But because those riskier drivers are choosing third-party policies and, resultantly, are putting in claims, it’s driven the cost of third-party policies up.
In the same vein, insurers often deem those who opt for fully comprehensive policies as more careful and responsible drivers, due to the fact they want a more encompassing policy to cover them and their car.
However, this trend may well be cyclical. As high-risk drivers cotton onto the fact that, in actuality, they could get a superior level of cover for less money, more of them will buy fully comprehensive policies. And when high-risk drivers put in claims on their fully comprehensive policy – as, statistically, they will – we may well see third-party policies becoming cheaper again. It’s all based on stats and, as it stands, more claims are made on third-party policies than fully comprehensive ones because of the type of driver that buys them.
Yet there is another reason why third-party only policies can be more expensive, and that’s because fewer providers offer them. Therefore, there are significantly fewer deals on the market so you tend not to get the best value for money. Depending on your circumstances, a fully comprehensive policy could save you hundreds on your insurance whilst giving you better cover. For low-risk, experienced drivers, fully comprehensive and third-party only policies tend to be similar prices, so you’re best off getting fully comp cover.