 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@iainm, we're not arguing we're largely aligned not not seeing things that make us think we'd get value from membership of SCGB as it stands.
Anyway back to the insurance point which is interesting re heli rescue - we know that in certain places the default pisteurs action is to call in a heli for what to us might intuitively seem lower order injuries - knee ligaments/ broken arms/wrists etc. Certainly I think this is common in Austria. No election by the patient but is this something one might expect an Insurer to query and maybe even say you should have asked about cheaper form of rescue? My answer would be I was in a lot of pain and following what the professionals attending ordered. Anyone seen a reject on the heli bill?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| Anyone seen a reject on the heli bill? |
My claim (on a BASI badged version of Dogtag insurance) went through without any questions whatsoever. Even got a message via Facebook from the Dogtag CEO asking if I needed any assistance, which was very reassuring.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Mike Pow wrote: |
...
1. James has 'been working' in the ski industry not just 'been' in the ski industry for a substantial amount of time.
His CV and and successes would suggest he's the right man for the job. If he's allowed to do it.
... |
Which business successes were you looking at specifically? I missed that completely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| iainm wrote: |
| In relation to James Gambrill (Declaration: I have never worked with him directly, but I've known him for 20 years), I'd personally give him more than a few weeks before making any judgements. |
Oh, I love Google: https://www.skipedia.co.uk/2012/05/skipedia-teams-up-with-expedient-marketing/ I'd call that firmly 'working with' but never mind. Yes, obviously, he needs to be given time to make a difference but the MO of the Council would seem to work against that. My beef would always be with the Chair and the Council THEY are telling HIM what to do, whereas HE should be telling THEM what he thinks the direction should be. Six weeks in though, just a few months from the hotting up of the pre-season, and there seems to be no discernible enthusiasm or activity - the same tired old membership 'benefits', the same lackadaisical communications, the same un-updated website content and a dollop more of rep ambiguity. I can think of people I've worked with who would have attacked all of that on the first morning.
My key takeaway from the podcast was the question of relevancy. Saying "it's not going to be for everyone" and essentially saying "not for beginners" had me shaking my head. If they want a successful club they cannot afford to think like that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| mike wrote: |
| Seemed far reaching and successful to me |
I read his CV on LinkedIn, which he curates, plus the accounts of the recent companies from Companies House.
I guess everyone reads these things differently.
<laughs> Me also.
The interview was obviously friendly, which I don't see as a problem. I also don't think any declaration was necessary.
However anything claimed ought not to be misleading, deliberately or otherwise. That's not good marketing!
| pruman wrote: |
| ... Six weeks in though, just a few months from the hotting up of the pre-season, and there seems to be no discernible enthusiasm or activity - the same tired old membership 'benefits', the same lackadaisical communications, the same un-updated website content and a dollop more of rep ambiguity. I can think of people I've worked with who would have attacked all of that on the first morning. |
Yeah. But as per the first point here, they didn't recruit anyone with experience of this stuff. They're going to keep on keeping on until the cash runs out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Illustrative exchange on the Ski Club of Great Britain. Members: past, present and future! Facebook Group just a short while ago.
SCGB Member writes:
| Quote: |
| I've just received details of my new platinum membership and read the conditions attached to the family travel insurance. It turns out any member of my family under the age of 24 is not covered unless travelling with us and if they're under 24 and not in full time education they're not covered either! What a total waste of time and money that is. I then thought I'd have a look on the skiclub forum to see if anyone else was talking about this only to find that the forum has been removed from the website! I've been a member of the club for 25 years or thereabouts and that's it, I've had enough! |
SCGB Member continues after a bit of Council intervention:
| Quote: |
| Thanks but I really have had enough, insurance is rubbish, website is rubbish, weather / snow reporting is rubbish, forum has gone, no guiding, really struggling to see the point of the club any more |
Club Rep says:
| Quote: |
| it’s sad to hear that you feel that way. If you plan to ski off piste without a guide then SCGB insurance is very good. Only specialist, more expensive policies offer the same cover. We still offer a rep service. I’m hoping to be in Sauze D’Oulx next year and would love to show you round the mountains and win you back as a member! |
First thought - with no disrespect to Sauze or its patrons, it doesn't exactly tick many boxes for your typical Club Member. Second thought - ermmmmm, isn't that guiding/leading?
So there, neatly laid out, is the issue they face. Long-standing members are on their toes and Reps haven't got the memo about being un-uniformed social facilitators.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
And if you look at their site to see who is repping/leading a lot of the slots are showing as 'tbc'. I suspect the old guard is bailing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
@Pruman, I think you'll find that Sauze D’Oulx is in Italy, and therefore not currently the subject of any "different" arrangements such as ILG which they've had to offer in France. That said, the confusion around reps and their allowed activities probably isn't helping them, and they need to be clearer on that as well as apparently needing to be clearer on their insurance offering, but as always the small print will say exactly the right thing if only people had bothered to read that before buying the policy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Member 1 sounds like a bit of a fool - I'm not sure it's a realistic expectation for a "family" policy to cover any independent adult on their own independent activities.
Having said that isn't it a bit desperate for reps to be trying to "win back" members 1 by 1 on facebook? Surely the value proposition needs to be clear, complete and compelling?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Pruman wrote: |
Illustrative exchange ...
Club Rep says:
it’s sad to hear that you feel that way. If you plan to ski off piste without a guide then SCGB insurance is very good. Only specialist, more expensive policies offer the same cover. We still offer a rep service. I’m hoping to be in Sauze D’Oulx next year and would love to show you round the mountains and win you back as a member! |
Is it true that their insurance for off-piste without a guide is the cheapest available?
That's a specific claim they're making.
A "rep service" for "showing you round[sic] the mountains".
That sounds legally interesting. Good to know they're establishing in writing what they're going to do, I'm sure
that will be very handy in due course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
@Dave of the Marmottes, I'd expect a family policy to cover everyone whatever they were doing and whoever with. It's just a way of insuring more people in one policy.
Be interested to see if this is the norm though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
@MorningGory, my random (multitrip.com I think) 'gold level' married couple insurance covers us both separately for trips. I think it's pretty standard from the policies I've had too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| ousekjarr wrote: |
| @Pruman, I think you'll find that Sauze D’Oulx is in Italy, and therefore not currently the subject of any "different" arrangements such as ILG which they've had to offer in France. |
A good job you're here  but I think you'll find it doesn't matter what country Sauze is in because leading/guiding as we knew it has ceased in all Rep resorts, replaced either by ILG in France or a 'mingle in with the group / under-the-radar-back-marker / sneaky facilitator' role. How do you ski The Milky Way - stop at the French border and hand over to a waiting instructor?
So a Rep saying:
| Quote: |
| I’m hoping to be in Sauze D’Oulx next year and would love to show you round the mountains and win you back as a member! |
simply hasn't understood the new landscape, but more likely is signalling how they are going to ignore it.
From FAQs
| Quote: |
Q - CAN I STILL SKI WITH A SKI CLUB REP?A - Yes, our Reps are encouraged to ski alongside members in a social capacity. Although our Ski Club Reps are no longer Ski Club “Leaders”, our Reps are there to help facilitate a great day of social skiing. Although the Reps will no longer wear their blue jackets and lead from the front, the Rep can still share their knowledge of the mountain and enable social-skiing groups to get the most out of the days skiing. Members can form social skiing groups, where each member of the group is equal, those within the group with specific knowledge can share their wisdom. The Reps knowledge of a resort if of course valuable and our Reps are encouraged to share this knowledge with the group.
Reps will also play a vital role still on our Ski Club Freshtracks holiday, where they will either “back-mark” behind one of the many incredible guides on the Freshtracks trips, or they will help the members form social skiing groups, joining the groups for a great day on the mountain. |
Conclusion - Repping is now an unattractive job hence "tba" alongside all the Rep resorts. And it's no longer a worthwhile Member benefit. It's an ex parrot.
Given all that, this requirement still baffles me:
| Quote: |
| Q - BEING A SKI CLUB REP LOOKS GREAT! HOW DO I APPLY?A - Brilliant! We are always looking to grow and expand our Rep community. In order to become a Rep, you must complete our Ski Club Mountain Safety and Leadership Course. The course runs in Tignes, France at the start of each season. For more information on the course requirements and content please click here. |
| MorningGory wrote: |
| @Dave of the Marmottes, I'd expect a family policy to cover everyone whatever they were doing and whoever with. It's just a way of insuring more people in one policy. |
A family travelling together would have a different risk profile to a couple of young adults travelling independently. That's my guess as to their thinking.
Things seem to be afoot in the travel insurance business. I've been trawling the market looking at my options - MPI Brokers are still without an underwriter by the looks of it (since March!) and therefore also BASI, and on lots of sites I am seeing this type of message:
| Quote: |
All new sales have been temporarily suspended
We are currently undertaking some business changes relating to our insurer and as a result are unable to offer new policies or convert quotes at the moment. |
I had a conversation with one and was told that two of the biggest underwriters have packed up and left the market leaving 'significant capacity issues' (in other words a lot of schemes chasing very few underwriters who only have a certain amount of underwriting capacity). Don't be surprised if (a) rates go up markedly and (b) some players suddenly find themselves without an underwriter. If it can happen to MPI it can happen to Ski Club so, if I were them, I'd be all over this or that particular revenue stream could be in peril.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
@Pruman,
| Quote: |
If it can happen to MPI
|
Is MPI going to fold, or what?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Hurtle wrote: |
@Pruman,
| Quote: |
If it can happen to MPI
|
Is MPI going to fold, or what? |
I'd suspect that current policies are fine as they will be inderwritten, renewals might be more of an issue. Equally I'd expect MPI being pros at this are probably more effective at finding an appropriate replacement underwriter than the part timers at SCGB.
It's a possibly concerning whammy for all of us - my last annual policy expired at end March 20 and for obvious reasons haven't yet put in place a replacement - might be some panic buying as winter approaches. I can see why underwriters might have said why retail travel insurance wasn't for them - tiny volumes in the past year, large geopolitical risk around COVID remaining.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@Dave of the Marmottes, my MPI policy has also expired. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Hurtle wrote: |
@Pruman,
| Quote: |
If it can happen to MPI
|
Is MPI going to fold, or what? |
You can ask them at the snow show if you go , the latest email from the show says
MPI, the Show's official insurance provider, will also be on hand to ensure all your insurance needs are met before you travel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was insured with MPI until the pandemic. They were good enough to give me a refund on my annual premium when I told them I was no longer a risk as I wouldn't be travelling. I hope they offer quotes again soon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was insured with MPI until the pandemic. They were good enough to give me a refund on my annual premium when I told them I was no longer a risk as I wouldn't be travelling. I hope they offer quotes again soon. Meanwhile the SCGB is on my shortlist with LV= . It's hard finding cover at my advanced age.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
@Jehu, I always use the BMC, usually an annual alpine and ski package, have you tried them?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| On the rocks wrote: |
| @Jehu, I always use the BMC, usually an annual alpine and ski package, have you tried them? |
yes. They were the most expensive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
I think BMC insurance is pretty much gold standard but it is definitely overkill for many recreational skiers even if they do like skiing off piste. The trouble with mass market products is you have to be very careful about offpiste definitions and conditions. So there is a need for the likes of MPI to bring that clarity and dependibility to the next level down of insurance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| rob@rar wrote: |
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| Anyone seen a reject on the heli bill? |
My claim (on a BASI badged version of Dogtag insurance) went through without any questions whatsoever. Even got a message via Facebook from the Dogtag CEO asking if I needed any assistance, which was very reassuring. |
Dogtag left us high and dry with COVID cover. A policy we RENEWED on 5th Jan 2020 had a detailed section in the online version of the cover information explicitly excluding COVID by March 2020. Trouble is I didn't take a copy of the online version at the time. I am 99% sure they have modified it after we renewed but have no proof.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@ringingmaster, did you ask them for the wording of the policy at the time you renewed as that is what should have been in force for you? Shabby if they couldn't or wouldn't supply that. Otherwise you could have asked them for the change record of when they changed the policy to include the Covid warning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
@Dave of the Marmottes,
Yes, and was sent exactly what was online. I gave up as our losses weren't that great.
I pasted the specific wording on another Snowheads thread and another Snowhead who was in the industry said that was standard industry COVID wording created way after 5 Jan.
Learning was never to use Dogtag again after being a customer for 8 years, and always download the insurance details the day you buy it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Hurtle wrote: |
@Pruman,
| Quote: |
If it can happen to MPI
|
Is MPI going to fold, or what? |
I somehow doubt they'll fold, they are not alone and there will be more in the same boat before this plays out. Eventually things will return to 'normal' and demand for travel cover will surely soar. The question is how long it'll take for insurers to have the appetite and appropriate capital adequacy to take on more business - especially riskier fringe activities like wintersports which I suspect aren't exactly profitable. If I remember correctly from previous years, The Ski Club's scheme renews around September time and I hope for their sake they are all over that situation - insurance was probably the only aspect of the business to contribute positively to the bottom line.
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| I think BMC insurance is pretty much gold standard but it is definitely overkill for many recreational skiers even if they do like skiing off piste. The trouble with mass market products is you have to be very careful about offpiste definitions and conditions. So there is a need for the likes of MPI to bring that clarity and dependibility to the next level down of insurance. |
So, I got a quote for a 45 day annual multi trip with off-piste (with or without guide), Europe only, for £220 - that doesn't seem too bad especially if you eat up all 45 days - a fiver a day. I was amused to see that Snowboarders have to tick a box and they pay more . Park & pipe are excluded - not that I'd be seen dead or alive in there!
| ringingmaster wrote: |
| rob@rar wrote: |
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| Anyone seen a reject on the heli bill? |
My claim (on a BASI badged version of Dogtag insurance) went through without any questions whatsoever. Even got a message via Facebook from the Dogtag CEO asking if I needed any assistance, which was very reassuring. |
Dogtag left us high and dry with COVID cover. A policy we RENEWED on 5th Jan 2020 had a detailed section in the online version of the cover information explicitly excluding COVID by March 2020. Trouble is I didn't take a copy of the online version at the time. I am 99% sure they have modified it after we renewed but have no proof. |
That, funnily enough, is one of the brands currently unable to sell new policies.
First UK case of Coronavirus was 31st January but it was a concern to people travelling by early January and I suspect treated in exactly the same way as the SARS outbreak of 2003 - ie they thought it was a 'far east thing' but better account for it in case anyone is thinking of travelling there or it spreads. The World Health Organization declared the outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on 30 Jan and a pandemic on 11 March. It would surprise me therefore if they had it in the wordings by name as early as 5th January but they will have an audit trail of policy wording changes and, trust me, you can find out. Your policy probably excluded pandemics (and maybe mentioned SARS, some still do) anyway. What they should do is have a download area on their site which says something like 'Policy Wording For Policies Sold Between xx date and xx date'. But ask them or, better, raise a complaint, they DO have to deal with it. To be fair there would have been a lot of rabbits in headlights going on in Spring 2020.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Pruman wrote: |
| ringingmaster wrote: |
Dogtag left us high and dry with COVID cover. A policy we RENEWED on 5th Jan 2020 had a detailed section in the online version of the cover information explicitly excluding COVID by March 2020. Trouble is I didn't take a copy of the online version at the time. I am 99% sure they have modified it after we renewed but have no proof. |
That, funnily enough, is one of the brands currently unable to sell new policies.
First UK case of Coronavirus was 31st January but it was a concern to people travelling by early January and I suspect treated in exactly the same way as the SARS outbreak of 2003 - ie they thought it was a 'far east thing' but better account for it in case anyone is thinking of travelling there or it spreads. The World Health Organization declared the outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on 30 Jan and a pandemic on 11 March. It would surprise me therefore if they had it in the wordings by name as early as 5th January but they will have an audit trail of policy wording changes and, trust me, you can find out. Your policy probably excluded pandemics (and maybe mentioned SARS, some still do) anyway. What they should do is have a download area on their site which says something like 'Policy Wording For Policies Sold Between xx date and xx date'. But ask them or, better, raise a complaint, they DO have to deal with it. To be fair there would have been a lot of rabbits in headlights going on in Spring 2020. |
They have "download area on their site which says something like 'Policy Wording For Policies Sold Between xx date and xx date' ". I downloaded the appropriate date specific copy for Jan 5th 2020, and the wording was:
| Dogtag wrote: |
• There is no cover under this policy for cancellation, abandonment or curtailment claims if the Foreign and
Commonwealth Office (FCO) advises you not to travel, for example where the FCO advise against all but
essential travel to an area affected by Coronavirus, COVID-19, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome
(SARS-COV-2) or any mutation of Coronavirus, COVID-19 or SARs-COV-2.
• There is no cover under this policy for any claims as a result of Coronavirus, COVID-19, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome
(SARS-COV-2), any mutation of Coronavirus, COVID-19 or SARs-COV-2 or any pandemic or fear or threat ofany the above.
Except for Section B3 If you need emergency medical attention. This will only apply if you did not travelagainst the published
advice of the FCO, any local government, local authority or WHO
. |
Water under the bridge now....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Then that is demonstrably wrong, and you should open a case with the insurance ombudsman.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Pruman wrote: |
| ..... Eventually things will return to 'normal' and demand for travel cover will surely soar. |
Except I suppose for people who have discovered that their insurance was worthless.
I self-insure, had significant trips booked, and was about to get on an internal Canadian flight as the world shut down...
but my end-of-play costs were very close to zero. I saved lots on not buying insurance I didn't need.
| Pruman wrote: |
| .... especially riskier fringe activities like wintersports which I suspect aren't exactly profitable. If I remember correctly from previous years, The Ski Club's scheme renews around September time and I hope for their sake they are all over that situation - insurance was probably the only aspect of the business to contribute positively to the bottom line. ... |
If it "contributes to the bottom line" then it is profitable by definition.
I'm not sure if you're arguing that SCGB branded insurance isn't profitable, or that it is. I'd say that anyone who finds winter sports "risky" is not really doing them right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| philwig wrote: |
I'm not sure if you're arguing that SCGB branded insurance isn't profitable, or that it is. I'd say that anyone who finds winter sports "risky" is not really doing them right. |
There are plenty of people "not doing them right" from granny taken along for a bit of childminding who breaks her ankle slipping on an icy pavement first day upwards. Basically the only surgical interventions I've ever needed in my life have resulted from skiing/boarding or mountain biking and I was out of the UK on each occasion when sustaining the core injury. As it turns out I had surgery in all cases in the UK after repat but it could well have been necessary elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
@ringingmaster, the document name alone says March, and the document properties confirm that. You should report this - they are not allowed to retrospectively update the policy document. They can clarify that their existing terms mean that you are not covered, but they have to do this in a separate advisory note rather than by changing the terms of the contract unilaterally. The advisory note is also not legally binding - it can be challenged via the ombudsman, or in the courts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| philwig wrote: |
| I self-insure..................I saved lots on not buying insurance I didn't need. |
At some point in time your luck runs out, or at least you should assume so or insurance as a product wouldn't need to exist. Well done on surviving this far. You mention Canada - imagine being seriously ill or injured there, you want to get back home or your family want what's left of you back home, but no airline will take you and even if they did it would be with a doctor and nurse escort. The costs of medical treatment and repatriation are simply eye-watering. Meanwhile, the cost of a week or two travel insurance is peanuts.
| philwig wrote: |
| I'm not sure if you're arguing that SCGB branded insurance isn't profitable, or that it is. I'd say that anyone who finds winter sports "risky" is not really doing them right. |
It's probably unprofitable for the insurer or quite close to the line - lots of admin costs, lots of small transactions with comparison sites driving rates ever lower, lots of exposure to big medical claims. The Club would be on a set percentage commission come what may so, for the Club, it's all profit. In the current climate I think they should be doing all they can to shore up that aspect of their business.
Wintersports is definitely riskier than most other travel - we've all got a long list of friends, or indeed ourselves, who have needed medical attention and if you work out all the costs and compare it to what we have to pay, it's a good deal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| philwig wrote: |
I self-insure, had significant trips booked, and was about to get on an internal Canadian flight as the world shut down...
but my end-of-play costs were very close to zero. I saved lots on not buying insurance I didn't need.
|
Since insurers aim to make a profit on insurance they sell I take the view that I will only buy insurance in the following circumstances:
1. Where it is a legal requirement e.g car insurance
2. Where if the circumstances insured against were to occur it would be such a large financial cost that if I had to pay for the cost it would take a substantial fraction or all of my financial resources e.g house insurance, accident and medical cover for travelling abroad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
If your point is that one ought to be aware of the costs and risks one takes, I'd certainly agree with that.
You're wrong to assume that I don't absolutely know the potential costs and risks I take personally, but there's not much public use in that.
You seemed to be arguing simultaneously that SCGB branded insurance both is and isn't profitable at the same time, which seemed contradictory.
As you now point out, clearly they stuff at a percentage, which obviously is a positive number. QED.
Risk wise, there are public sources of relative risk information.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Alastair Pink wrote: |
... Since insurers aim to make a profit on insurance they sell I take the view that I will only buy insurance in the following circumstances:
1. Where it is a legal requirement e.g car insurance
2. Where if the circumstances insured against were to occur it would be such a large financial cost that ... |
Agree 100%.
However I seem to recall that it's possible not to insure a car [contrary to popular opinion] in the UK if you've
enough capital to cover the likely costs you could incur. I dare say that's googlable, but probably best not in this thread.
---
Any news on the SCGB - is it time for a new leader yet?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
]
