Got home from a bike Club trip to France yesterday to find the renewal waiting on the door mat.
Fully comp on the R1200ST, Protected no claims and no voluntary excess (compulsory £400). Annual Premium £77.05.
So I tried the MCN comparison site - their cheapest was £84.87 with a total of £900 excess.
So I'll stick to Bennetts this year
There would appear to be a surfeit of prolixity and sesquipedalian content today please do not use a big word when a singularly un-loquacious and diminutive linguistic expression will satisfactorily accomplish the contemporary necessity
I renewed my ST with Bennetts (bought out by Saga a while ago, I believe) in July....£56 with protected NCB and zero 'voluntary' excess, including use abroad.
Now, is it the...ahem...more mature rider that produces such reasonable premiums.......or the fact that the ST sold in such small numbers that it doesn't figure in any negative stats anywhere?!
I'd try a quote on Saga's own website as a 'new' customer - could bring it down some more!
milleplod wrote:I renewed my ST with Bennetts (bought out by Saga a while ago, I believe) in July....£56 with protected NCB and zero 'voluntary' excess, including use abroad.
Now, is it the...ahem...more mature rider that produces such reasonable premiums.......or the fact that the ST sold in such small numbers that it doesn't figure in any negative stats anywhere?!
I'd try a quote on Saga's own website as a 'new' customer - could bring it down some more!
Pete
My first ST appears in negative stas as it was written off in 2013. So Iguess if you think 57 is more mature that would be the reason.
There would appear to be a surfeit of prolixity and sesquipedalian content today please do not use a big word when a singularly un-loquacious and diminutive linguistic expression will satisfactorily accomplish the contemporary necessity
I think the ST is so ugly they don't feature in any 'theft' stats, reducing the risk. Also, the owners only ride at night away from any other road user who might see them reducing the stats even further.
Herb wrote:I think the ST is so ugly they don't feature in any 'theft' stats, reducing the risk. Also, the owners only ride at night away from any other road user who might see them reducing the stats even further.
This from someone who`s bike looks as if it has come off a fairground ride.
2000 BMW R1100s
1964 Royal Enfield 250cc Crusader
2012 Mazda Mx5 2.0ltr Kuro.
2004 Roller Team Granduca 171.
1992 Jaguar 4ltr Sovereign.
2018 Volvo t3 v40 Cross Country.
Reg & Gwen.
Herb wrote:I think the ST is so ugly they don't feature in any 'theft' stats, reducing the risk. Also, the owners only ride at night away from any other road user who might see them reducing the stats even further.
This from someone who`s bike looks as if it has come off a fairground ride.
Herb wrote:I think the ST is so ugly they don't feature in any 'theft' stats, reducing the risk. Also, the owners only ride at night away from any other road user who might see them reducing the stats even further.
This from someone who`s bike looks as if it has come off a fairground ride.
Maybe there should be a new "moniker" for that model.............
The "Barnum & Bailey", The "Billy Smart" or the "Chipperfield 1200s"
Al
If I am ever on life support - Unplug me......
Then plug me back in..........
Herb wrote:I think the ST is so ugly they don't feature in any 'theft' stats, reducing the risk. Also, the owners only ride at night away from any other road user who might see them reducing the stats even further.
This from someone who`s bike looks as if it has come off a fairground ride.
You're right. People who live in glass houses etc.....
Herb wrote:I think the ST is so ugly they don't feature in any 'theft' stats, reducing the risk. Also, the owners only ride at night away from any other road user who might see them reducing the stats even further.
Jealousy over the size of our headlamps and our ability to ride a night will get you nowhere.
There would appear to be a surfeit of prolixity and sesquipedalian content today please do not use a big word when a singularly un-loquacious and diminutive linguistic expression will satisfactorily accomplish the contemporary necessity