- T5 SE 180
I assume that the reason, actuarially speaking, is that the stats show that someone who has some kind of incident (eg a broken side window, a bashed rear bumper), even if not caused by the policyholder and regardless of whether they claimed, is correlated with an elevated likelihood of more serious incidents/claims in the following year(s).I have heard of the same happening and I don't think it would only be Admiral. If you are thinking of paying for insured damaged yourself you have to keep it to yourself I'm afraid and you can't compare their cost with your cost. I don't know why they do it. Maybe someone in the industry could explain.
Unfortunately this practice of bumping up premiums on the basis of non-claim "incidents" is bound to discourage people from reporting them to their insurer: ie it penalises honest customers who are actually the kind of customers the insurers should be rewarding, because It appears well-evidenced that people who tend to be "dishonest" and therefore would be unlikely to report incidents anyway, are also more likely to behave recklessly or even fraudulently in other ways, so are a higher risk.