Chris Bartram wrote:
On 24/02/2012 08:04, ARWadsworth wrote:

That requires that the named driver is a regular user of the car.
If not, it is misrepresentation of material details, which will
invalidate the insurance.

I am a named driver on my Mothers car insurance policy. I did not
drive it once last year.

I doubt that we are invalidating the insurance.

Indeed. The only requirement usually is that the driver that uses the
car most must be named as the main driver.

I wonder what the definition of "uses the car most" is?

The gf uses the car more than me but I drive more miles in it than she does.

--
Adam

On Feb 23, 10:59 pm, NT wrote:
On Feb 23, 9:15 pm, gremlin_95 wrote:



Hi all,

I will soon be needing to buy my first car. I was wondering what
recommendations and advice people on here would give? It will be used
for a lot motorway driving (commuting) due to the nature of the
apprenticeship I should soon be getting

I was looking at the Polo and Lupo from VW, the diesel versions as these
seem to give better economy for longer journeys?

I am not looking to buy new simply because I couldn't afford it.

Reliability and fuel efficiency are the most important things for me.
Not worried about 'street cred' as such. I know insurance is going to be
quite expensive though

http://www.gizmag.com/the-100-most-r...-last-decade-i...

NT

gizmag .com ??????

don't tell me...

Jim K

On Feb 23, 11:33 pm, Nightjar
wrote:
On 23/02/2012 22:49, Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 21:48:33 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Gabriel wrote:

If you're under 25, I would start by looking for insurance you can
afford. That might be as far as you get.

WHS. Putting two and two togther (gremlin_95& apprenticeship) we
might be looking at a 17 year old. Half saw on the telly the other
night possibly Superscrimpers that if a youngster adds an older
person as a named driver to their insurance the premium drops.

That requires that the named driver is a regular user of the car. If
not, it is misrepresentation of material details, which will invalidate
the insurance.

Colin Bignell

really? so what of people who name their spouses on each others
policies for emergency/holiday/car servicing use but hardly ever drive
them? their insurances are invalid?? nah shurely not...

Jim K

On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 00:43:20 +0000, gremlin_95 wrote:

Also be aware of barrack room lawyers, take anything anybody says
with a pinch of salt ...

Indeed,

Sorry to preach(*). But the number of people who take what they hear,
see or read from the people media or the 'net as absolute is
depressingly high.

Please refer to your schedule for the time categories that have been
allocated to your policy.

So you can't find out what the time periods are before you hand over
your dosh? HTF are you supposed to make a buying decision?

Difficult to find on some others, though you are allocated 6000 miles a
year with another company, you have to buy extra miles if needed!

Seems a bit stingey, 6000 miles is only a 25 mile daily commute (48
week year, 4 weeks hols).

(*) Don't start me on pensions. I know that a pension is in the far
far distant future but money shoved in now can grow for 40+ years. If
there is still a state retirement age (or indeed a state pension) by
the time you get there it may well be 70 or 75, that's well over 50+
years... If you can afford £10/month now (the cost of just a few
pints) it will be money well used. Get advice from an *independant*
Financial Advisor as to the best place to put it. I don't know if a
pension fund or a stocks and shares ISA both with a
"cautious/balanced" spread of investments would be best. With the ISA
you can still get at the funds, not so easy to get at the money in a
pension fund, nothing to stop you moving money from an ISA to a
pension in 10 - 20 years time.

--
Cheers
Dave.

In article ,
gremlin_95 wrote:
Reliability and fuel efficiency are the most important things for me.
Not worried about 'street cred' as such. I know insurance is going to be
quite expensive though

You need to look at the overall cost of car ownership - not just the
headline ones. Reliability also depends on decent servicing, and some cost
more than others for this. Also look at depreciation. Not so important as
with a newer vehicle, but still a running cost.

--
*Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder...

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 08:48:17 +0000, Chris Bartram wrote:

Either of those with a 1.4TDI is pretty economical, and reasonably quick
too.

The OP is 17, "reasonably quick" won't do the insurance premium any
favours. Perhaps an ancient SWB Defender or even Series Land Rover
would be a better bet?

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 23/02/12 21:15, gremlin_95 wrote:
Hi all,

I will soon be needing to buy my first car.

Motorbike?

[g]

On 24/02/2012 08:50, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 00:51:44 +0000, Nightjar wrote:

That requires that the named driver is a regular user of the car.

Define: "regular user".

You don't really expect an insurance company to set that in stone, so
that people can manipulate the use to qualify do you?

If they use "reasonable" they have to lay down what they deem as
"resaonable" otherwise it's what "the person on the street" would
take a s "reasonable"...

The insurance industry is not noted for making decisions that the man on
the street would.

We very rarerly use the others car and what use there is not
"regular".

... will expect that the named driver has reasonable use of the car.

Stop wriggling. That is not the same as "a regular user of the car".

I'm not 'wriggling' I am simply relaying a recent discussion on the
radio in which a chap from one of the insurance companies used both terms.

....
What is reasonable, the insurers will decide,

No if push comes to shove it's what the courts decide. "Resonable"
has no legal definition it's what the "man on the street" would think
as "reasonable".

At best, it will be what the financial ombudsman decides, unless you
think it is a realistic expectation that a 17 yo who is trying to save
money on insurance will take on an insurance company in the Courts.
Meanwhile, he will be guilty of driving without insurance.

Colin Bignell

I love my 02 plate Suzuki Swift. It is not at all quick or trendy, but
it has done me 10 months of driving from Devon to Essex and back every
other weekend and is still going strong. Insurance is on the cheaper
end of the scale.

I've put 50,000 miles since I bought it three years ago and it has
cost me servicing (got a new cam belt put on it when I first got it
serviced). A new exaust, battery, ht leads, tyres and sunries like the
odd windscreen wiper and bulb. It will need new brake discs/pads very
soon I suspect. I think that is more than good.

If you are a young driver, best advice I can give is don't have an
accident (so keep the speed right down and drive carefully), or the
insurance rise next time might put you off the road.

Philip

On 24/02/2012 09:17, Jim K wrote:
On Feb 23, 11:33 pm,
wrote:
On 23/02/2012 22:49, Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 21:48:33 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Gabriel wrote:

If you're under 25, I would start by looking for insurance you can
afford. That might be as far as you get.

WHS. Putting two and two togther (gremlin_95& apprenticeship) we
might be looking at a 17 year old. Half saw on the telly the other
night possibly Superscrimpers that if a youngster adds an older
person as a named driver to their insurance the premium drops.

That requires that the named driver is a regular user of the car. If
not, it is misrepresentation of material details, which will invalidate
the insurance.

Colin Bignell

really? so what of people who name their spouses on each others
policies for emergency/holiday/car servicing use but hardly ever drive
them? their insurances are invalid?? nah shurely not...

To clarify: I am relaying a recent discussion on the radio in which an
insurance spokesman was talking specifically about the case where an
older named driver is included on the insurance of a young person solely
for the purposes of reducing the premium.

Colin Bignell

On 24/02/2012 07:55, MuddyMike wrote:
wrote in message
news
On 23/02/2012 22:49, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 21:48:33 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Gabriel wrote:

If you're under 25, I would start by looking for insurance you can
afford. That might be as far as you get.

WHS. Putting two and two togther (gremlin_95& apprenticeship) we
might be looking at a 17 year old. Half saw on the telly the other
night possibly Superscrimpers that if a youngster adds an older
person as a named driver to their insurance the premium drops.

That requires that the named driver is a regular user of the car. If not,
it is misrepresentation of material details, which will invalidate the
insurance.

No, just occasional use will do. Driving the car back from station/airport
once or twice a year for instance.

To clarify: I am relaying a recent discussion on the radio in which an
insurance spokesman was talking specifically about the case where an
older named driver is included on the insurance of a young person solely
for the purposes of reducing the premium.

Colin Bignell

On 24/02/2012 08:04, ARWadsworth wrote:
Nightjar wrote:
On 23/02/2012 22:49, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 21:48:33 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Gabriel wrote:

If you're under 25, I would start by looking for insurance you can
afford. That might be as far as you get.

WHS. Putting two and two togther (gremlin_95& apprenticeship) we
might be looking at a 17 year old. Half saw on the telly the other
night possibly Superscrimpers that if a youngster adds an older
person as a named driver to their insurance the premium drops.

That requires that the named driver is a regular user of the car. If
not, it is misrepresentation of material details, which will
invalidate the insurance.

I am a named driver on my Mothers car insurance policy. I did not drive it
once last year.

I doubt that we are invalidating the insurance.

To clarify: I am relaying a recent discussion on the radio in which an
insurance spokesman was talking specifically about the case where an
older named driver is included on the insurance of a young person solely
for the purposes of reducing the premium.

Colin Bignell

On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 08:25:30 +0000, Rob wrote:

What sort of mileage are you looking at per year?

Given this, the mileage would probably be around 10608 a year?

Er - more like 20,000.

I make it 16,800/year (35 miles each way, 5 days a week for 48
weeks). A decent diesel ought to manage 50mpg+, 336 gallons, 1528l,
£45/week fuel (ish) will rise!

Really well done on getting the apprenticeship by the way - great
achievement. Don't mean to put you off.

Agreed, OP does appear to be a sensible lad. I just hope the
economics don't scupper him, £100/week+ just to get to and from his
apprenticeship. The minimum wage apprentice rate is £2.60/hr or
£96.20 (before tax/NI)for a 37hr week. B-(

--
Cheers
Dave.

"Nightjar" wrote in message
...
On 24/02/2012 07:55, MuddyMike wrote:
wrote in message
news
On 23/02/2012 22:49, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 21:48:33 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Gabriel wrote:

If you're under 25, I would start by looking for insurance you can
afford. That might be as far as you get.

WHS. Putting two and two togther (gremlin_95& apprenticeship) we
might be looking at a 17 year old. Half saw on the telly the other
night possibly Superscrimpers that if a youngster adds an older
person as a named driver to their insurance the premium drops.

That requires that the named driver is a regular user of the car. If
not,
it is misrepresentation of material details, which will invalidate the
insurance.

No, just occasional use will do. Driving the car back from
station/airport
once or twice a year for instance.

To clarify: I am relaying a recent discussion on the radio in which an
insurance spokesman was talking specifically about the case where an older
named driver is included on the insurance of a young person solely for the
purposes of reducing the premium.

I think "solely for the purposes of reducing the premium." makes all the
difference.

Mike

On 24/02/2012 09:19, Dave Liquorice wrote:
....
(*) Don't start me on pensions. I know that a pension is in the far
far distant future but money shoved in now can grow for 40+ years. If
there is still a state retirement age (or indeed a state pension) by
the time you get there it may well be 70 or 75, that's well over 50+
years... If you can afford £10/month now (the cost of just a few
pints) it will be money well used.

I would wholeheartedly agree. I started my first pension scheme at age
19, after working out what the state pension would buy. That is one of
the reasons I now have a pension that many people would be happy to have
as a salary.

Get advice from an *independant*
Financial Advisor as to the best place to put it. I don't know if a
pension fund or a stocks and shares ISA both with a
"cautious/balanced" spread of investments would be best.

I would suggest putting a small proportion into higher risk investments.
Given a good enough spread, which your advisor should arrange, the gains
will outweigh the losses. I put 10% of one pension fund into a high risk
investment fund. Over 10 years it averaged 17% growth, which was
considerably more than anything else offered. The funds that worked
actually achieved 25% growth, but that was reduced by the losses. Note:
this is not an option for anyone who frightens easily or who does not
realise that you need to take a very long term view of pensions investments.

With the ISA
you can still get at the funds, not so easy to get at the money in a
pension fund, nothing to stop you moving money from an ISA to a
pension in 10 - 20 years time.

There is something to be said for not being able to get at your pension
fund, even in times of need.

Colin Bignell

"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 23:08:25 +0000
Rick wrote:

On 23/02/2012 9:15 PM, gremlin_95 wrote:


Reliability and fuel efficiency are the most important things for
me. Not worried about 'street cred' as such. I know insurance is
going to be quite expensive though



My Triumph Herald was a good choice.

So was mine. Great fun when driven at speed around corners, thereby
frightening anyone who had heard about rear-wheel tuck-under. I put a
Spitfire engine and O/D gearbox in mine, and ran it for years. And it
towed a car trailer.

I used to remove the roof from mine in the summer:-)

Mike

"Dave Liquorice" wrote in message
ll.co.uk...
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 08:48:17 +0000, Chris Bartram wrote:

Either of those with a 1.4TDI is pretty economical, and reasonably quick
too.

The OP is 17, "reasonably quick" won't do the insurance premium any
favours. Perhaps an ancient SWB Defender or even Series Land Rover
would be a better bet?

My son's first car was a V8 3.5ltr 110 running on LPG. It was cheaper to
insure and run than his mates old Fiesta, but sounded fantastic:-)

Sadly it was too big to park at uni, hence the Renault 5 mentioned earlier.

Mike

On 24/02/2012 08:25, Rob wrote:
On 23/02/2012 22:34, gremlin_95 wrote:
On 23/02/2012 21:33, ARWadsworth wrote:

Have a word with the employer - they may let you use a pool car/van so
long as it's in the pool 9-5 and you use it for commuting only. I did
that for my first traineeship - it means nothing to them. You just have
to make it sound as though it's good for business. Promise to valet it
weekly for them :-)


Commuting in a company van isn't a taxable benefit. So better still.

In article , gremlin_95
scribeth thus
On 23/02/2012 23:20, Newshound wrote

IMHO most things with 80k miles on them, if they look reasonably tidy
and havn't been mucked around with by boy racers, will probably be OK
for the next 40k with no more than petrol, tyres, and the occasional
battery or exhaust. You might have to replace the cam belt and one set
of brakes.

As for routing, I would go by time, but for you cost might be the
driver. There's probably not much in it, all depends on the average
speed and amount of stop-start on the different routes.


Thank you, I honestly don't mind an old car and I am happy to keep an
old car going (if it is economical to do so of course)

I find new cars have no character compared to a nice old car.



Indeed My 17 year olde Audi A6 estate was clocked up some 200 K miles
and still drives fine. Passed the MOT the other week just a sidelight
bulb and a quick adjust of the handbrake and thats all fine..

--
Tony Sayer

In article o.uk, Dave
Liquorice scribeth thus
On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 23:32:44 +0000, gremlin_95 wrote:

About the box fitted to the car, my instructor was telling me it can be
cheaper but if I was to drive after 000 - 0500* I could get a fine,
there are also other limitations.

That's why a said "look at", ie. read the small print.

Strikes me as a bit harsh to be fined for using the car between
midnight and 0500, an adjustment to the premium, if regular, I could
understand but not for a single "out of pattern" use in that period.

I have been told that limitation applies to some young driver polices. I
can only suppose that a young lad out at night at weekends with his
mates in the motah is a larger risk that most all other times...

However with that limitation it did make quite some difference to the
premium charged which in practice is prolly the largest cost for the
younger driver these days..
--
Tony Sayer

In article , gremlin_95
scribeth thus
On 23/02/2012 21:48, Andrew Gabriel wrote:
In ,
writes:
Hi all,

I will soon be needing to buy my first car. I was wondering what
I know insurance is going to be
quite expensive though
If you're under 25, I would start by looking for insurance
you can afford. That might be as far as you get.

If you can negotiate a company car (even in exchange for a
large reduction in wages), that might also work out much
cheaper.

Thanks, I am 17 so insurance is very expensive, I am looking for part
time work at the moment to save as much as I can so I don't have to make
my parents pay every penny etc ...

Good lad. Now it is very difficult these days to get on the road. When I
started driving back in 1971 insurance wasn't anywhere near what it can
cost now even relative to earnings. I have heard quotes of up to several
thousand pounds for young new male drivers but as theres no smoke
without fire there must be a reason for it.

I think the answer lies somewhere in "compensation claim lawyers" at the
end of the day;!....





--
Tony Sayer

In article , The Natural Philosopher
scribeth thus
Mark wrote:
gremlin_95 wrote:

Thanks, I am 17 so insurance is very expensive, I am looking for part
time work at the moment to save as much as I can so I don't have to make
my parents pay every penny etc ...

any saving you may make on MPG on buying a car will be far outweighed by the
insurance cost for a young driver in the first year.

+101

so pick your first car by its insurance rating
see
http://www.adrianflux.co.uk/blog/200...eens-cheapest-
young.html

Yep. Some of these tiddlers are really nice to drive - love the wife's
old Punto...could throw that around easily. Made out of used bacofoil
mind you, and bits kept falling off inside.



Also if our lads going about the A14 then he needs something like a tank
to survive that road to hell;!....
--
Tony Sayer

On 24/02/2012 09:44, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 08:25:30 +0000, Rob wrote:

What sort of mileage are you looking at per year?
Given this, the mileage would probably be around 10608 a year?
Er - more like 20,000.
I make it 16,800/year (35 miles each way, 5 days a week for 48
weeks). A decent diesel ought to manage 50mpg+, 336 gallons, 1528l,
£45/week fuel (ish) will rise!

Really well done on getting the apprenticeship by the way - great
achievement. Don't mean to put you off.
Agreed, OP does appear to be a sensible lad. I just hope the
economics don't scupper him, £100/week+ just to get to and from his
apprenticeship. The minimum wage apprentice rate is £2.60/hr or
£96.20 (before tax/NI)for a 37hr week. B-(

I know a lad on the same course as me (only he is doing it part time)
that got the same apprentice position I should be getting, they cover
his travel costs to college at least, don't think the work place is far
from where he lives though. The last time I checked he was on quite a
good wage as far as an apprentice is concerned

--
David

The only thing I don't like about Japanese cars and some others (French
I think?) is that they don't seem to have a very heavy solid feel to
it, almost like they feel very err tinny? Like when you shut the door on
my Dads Passat, it feels heavy and makes a thud, compare this to a
Toyota I have worked on, all you get is a tiny clunk. Just a personal
thing I guess.


Yes thats why I've always liked German built cars and owned a few
Passat's over time. One I had a 1991 registered, is still on the road as
is a very old Volvo 850 estate.

Even my set of wheels is now 17 years olde I really must get around to a
newer one so everyone sez, but while it keeps going and I can chuck a
load of building clobber in the back it will do fine
--
Tony Sayer

In article , MuddyMike
scribeth thus

"Dave Liquorice" wrote in message
ill.co.uk...
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 08:48:17 +0000, Chris Bartram wrote:

Either of those with a 1.4TDI is pretty economical, and reasonably quick
too.

The OP is 17, "reasonably quick" won't do the insurance premium any
favours. Perhaps an ancient SWB Defender or even Series Land Rover
would be a better bet?

My son's first car was a V8 3.5ltr 110 running on LPG. It was cheaper to
insure and run than his mates old Fiesta, but sounded fantastic:-)




Sadly it was too big to park at uni, hence the Renault 5 mentioned earlier.

Dunno if the motor proctor would allow that is this manor;!...


Mike



--
Tony Sayer

In article , george [dicegeorge]
scribeth thus
On 23/02/12 21:15, gremlin_95 wrote:
Hi all,

I will soon be needing to buy my first car.

Motorbike?

[g]

You cannot be serious;?...
--
Tony Sayer

snip

I am overwhelmed with all the replies, thanks a lot. I shall be taking
your advise into consideration and checking what I can do to make owning
a car affordable to me, if it just doesn't prove economical then I guess
will have to resort to using the bus. There is a fairly frequent service
that is quicker and cheaper than taking the train.


--
David

gremlin_95 wrote:
Hi all,

I will soon be needing to buy my first car. I was wondering what
recommendations and advice people on here would give? It will be used
for a lot motorway driving (commuting) due to the nature of the
apprenticeship I should soon be getting

I was looking at the Polo and Lupo from VW, the diesel versions as
these seem to give better economy for longer journeys?

I am not looking to buy new simply because I couldn't afford it.

Reliability and fuel efficiency are the most important things for me.
Not worried about 'street cred' as such. I know insurance is going to
be quite expensive though

Probably mentioned elsewhere but the 1.0L Toyota Yaris will fit the bill
regarding reliability, economy and insurance and are surprisingly nippy for
a 1L engine. Also completely lacking in "street cred" if that's what you're
after. ;-)

Tim

On 24/02/2012 11:33, tony sayer wrote:


Also if our lads going about the A14 then he needs something like a tank
to survive that road to hell;!....

Although it does sound as if it is the other end of the A14 which I have
never found to be particularly bad.

On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 10:07:53 -0000
"MuddyMike" wrote:


"Davey" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 23:08:25 +0000
Rick wrote:

On 23/02/2012 9:15 PM, gremlin_95 wrote:


Reliability and fuel efficiency are the most important things for
me. Not worried about 'street cred' as such. I know insurance is
going to be quite expensive though



My Triumph Herald was a good choice.

So was mine. Great fun when driven at speed around corners, thereby
frightening anyone who had heard about rear-wheel tuck-under. I put
a Spitfire engine and O/D gearbox in mine, and ran it for years.
And it towed a car trailer.

I used to remove the roof from mine in the summer:-)

Mike



I often wondered about that, but never did. But the chassis/body panel
construction should have made it safe.
My favourite memory is of buying an exhaust system, which came in one
piece, about nine feet long. I had freed the rear seat back (this was
before accommodation for skis was common), and a puzzled old couple
watched from the other side of the road as I inserted the whole exhaust
system into what looked, to them, like the boot of the car.
--
Davey.

On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 12:11:48 +0000
Andrew May wrote:

On 24/02/2012 11:33, tony sayer wrote:


Also if our lads going about the A14 then he needs something like a
tank to survive that road to hell;!....

Although it does sound as if it is the other end of the A14 which I
have never found to be particularly bad.

I wonder where the western end is? I just know it from Felixstowe to
the A1(M).
"Here be Monsters" as you go west?
--
Davey.

On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 11:48:47 +0000
gremlin_95 wrote:

snip

I am overwhelmed with all the replies, thanks a lot. I shall be
taking your advise into consideration and checking what I can do to
make owning a car affordable to me, if it just doesn't prove
economical then I guess will have to resort to using the bus. There
is a fairly frequent service that is quicker and cheaper than taking
the train.



From what I see, anything is cheaper than taking the train.

Also, congratulations on posting a question that appears to have *not*
deteriorated into unwanted abuse and name-calling! Well done, young man.
--
Davey.

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Doctor Drivel
scribeth thus

"gremlin_95" wrote in message
...

Reliability and fuel efficiency are the most important things for me.

Buy a Toyota or Honda. The rest can't touch them.

Electric ones of course...

That you. You are right.

On 24/02/2012 12:24, Davey wrote:
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 12:11:48 +0000
Andrew wrote:

On 24/02/2012 11:33, tony sayer wrote:


Also if our lads going about the A14 then he needs something like a
tank to survive that road to hell;!....

Although it does sound as if it is the other end of the A14 which I
have never found to be particularly bad.

I wonder where the western end is? I just know it from Felixstowe to
the A1(M).
"Here be Monsters" as you go west?

I think this is the bit that the OP will be using. It joins up with the
M6 and M1. Don't think I have ever been held up on the A1=M1 section -
but not sure I have ever been on it in the rush hour.

Davey wrote:
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 11:48:47 +0000
gremlin_95 wrote:

snip

I am overwhelmed with all the replies, thanks a lot. I shall be
taking your advise into consideration and checking what I can do to
make owning a car affordable to me, if it just doesn't prove
economical then I guess will have to resort to using the bus. There
is a fairly frequent service that is quicker and cheaper than taking
the train.



From what I see, anything is cheaper than taking the train.

Also, congratulations on posting a question that appears to have *not*
deteriorated into unwanted abuse and name-calling! Well done, young
man.

W*nker. ;-)

Tim

On 24/02/2012 13:03, Andrew May wrote:
On 24/02/2012 12:24, Davey wrote:
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 12:11:48 +0000
Andrew wrote:

On 24/02/2012 11:33, tony sayer wrote:


Also if our lads going about the A14 then he needs something like a
tank to survive that road to hell;!....

Although it does sound as if it is the other end of the A14 which I
have never found to be particularly bad.

I wonder where the western end is? I just know it from Felixstowe to
the A1(M).
"Here be Monsters" as you go west?

I think this is the bit that the OP will be using. It joins up with
the M6 and M1. Don't think I have ever been held up on the A1=M1
section - but not sure I have ever been on it in the rush hour.
It will be the A14 just after Junction 19 on the M1, looks like how you
describe on the map with it joining the M6 and M1

--
David

On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 11:18:12 +0000, tony sayer wrote:
Indeed My 17 year olde Audi A6 estate was clocked up some 200 K miles
and still drives fine. Passed the MOT the other week just a sidelight
bulb and a quick adjust of the handbrake and thats all fine..

Our Toyota's around 15 years and well over 200k; it needed a new battery
at something like 220k, but otherwise is still on original exhaust,
alternator, radiator etc.

Cam belt was due at 93k, but it's not broken yet.

I do need to replace most of the suspension bushes though, and it's
thirsty on oil these days. Cosmetically it's getting a little tired, but
then it has spent all of its life outside (my wife uses it for the
commute and doesn't like backing it out of the garage)

cheers

Jules

On 24/02/2012 12:27, Davey wrote:
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 11:48:47 +0000
wrote:

snip

I am overwhelmed with all the replies, thanks a lot. I shall be
taking your advise into consideration and checking what I can do to
make owning a car affordable to me, if it just doesn't prove
economical then I guess will have to resort to using the bus. There
is a fairly frequent service that is quicker and cheaper than taking
the train.


From what I see, anything is cheaper than taking the train.
I currently take the train to college, £11.10! I can't get a season
ticket or anything as it is only 3 days a week and you can only get a 3
day ticket to London

Luckily though, the college give me some money for travel which covers
just over half the cost.

Thing is with the train, I can have a nice rest, read some notes if I
need to and now I shall be revising for my theory test. Downsides are,
apart from the cost, I am forced into listening to someone else's music
through their crap leaky headphones and the old Sprinter units are
freezing in the morning.

--
David

On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 10:06:33 +0000, Nightjar wrote:

I would wholeheartedly agree. I started my first pension scheme at age
19, ...

I joined the company scheme when I had to at 21 not when I joined the
company at 18. I reckon those 3 years of missing contributions have
reduced the (small) pension by a few thousand pounds. I only
contributed for 14 years.

I would suggest putting a small proportion into higher risk investments.
Given a good enough spread, which your advisor should arrange, the gains
will outweigh the losses.

A "cautious" or "balanced" portfolio should do that. Ideally you
ought to take a test, forget the name, that asseses your aversion (or
not) to financial risk and then have a portfolio constructed over
several different types of investments and risks to match that
assesment.

It's also important to rebalance the holdings every year. Other wise
the proportion of the high risk / high return holdings may well mean
the overall protfolio shifts in risk, hopefully to higher risk which
you don't want.


Note: this is not an option for anyone who frightens easily or who does
not realise that you need to take a very long term view of pensions
investments.

Aye, pensions is really long term, yep have some stuff that might
produce 25%/annum but stick most of it in known and established funds
that just plod along at a steady few percent above the general bank
savings rates.

There is something to be said for not being able to get at your pension
fund, even in times of need.

I'm thinking that the OP is still very young and probably has some
large costs coming up in the next 10 years, house, family, etc. Using
say an ISA "pension" fund to put a deposit on house is just moving
the investment. ****ing it up against the wall is not such a good
idea...

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 24/02/2012 10:05, MuddyMike wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 24/02/2012 07:55, MuddyMike wrote:
wrote in message
news On 23/02/2012 22:49, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 21:48:33 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Gabriel wrote:

If you're under 25, I would start by looking for insurance you can
afford. That might be as far as you get.

WHS. Putting two and two togther (gremlin_95& apprenticeship) we
might be looking at a 17 year old. Half saw on the telly the other
night possibly Superscrimpers that if a youngster adds an older
person as a named driver to their insurance the premium drops.

That requires that the named driver is a regular user of the car. If
not,
it is misrepresentation of material details, which will invalidate the
insurance.

No, just occasional use will do. Driving the car back from
station/airport
once or twice a year for instance.

To clarify: I am relaying a recent discussion on the radio in which an
insurance spokesman was talking specifically about the case where an older
named driver is included on the insurance of a young person solely for the
purposes of reducing the premium.

I think "solely for the purposes of reducing the premium." makes all the
difference.

I had assumed that was fairly obvious from the context that I was
responding to a suggestion that putting an older driver on the insurance
would reduce the premium. Evidently not.

Colin Bignell