On 24/02/2012 10:06, Nightjar wrote:

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


Getting of topic now but does anyone know what the recommended pension
pot is nowadays? £1m in the bank would produce something like £10,000 in
interest if you are lucky. An annuity, hopefully a bit better.

In article , Andrew May
scribeth thus
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.

Umm it has two ends sure .. so which end
--
Tony Sayer

On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 13:19:11 +0000
gremlin_95 wrote:

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


There is also a problem on the A14 as it goes past Cambridge in the
rush hours, too much traffic for the available road. Luckily I can time
my trips to avoid this problem. But it's still not 'hell', there is the
M6 north of B'rum some years ago for my memory of that. Maybe that has
been relieved by the M6 Toll Road?
--
Davey.

In article , gremlin_95
writes
On 23/02/2012 22:37, fred wrote:
In article , gremlin_95
writes

It's been a while since I've been in that place but I would avoid the
brands (like VW) that have inflated 'value added' or popularity based
price differentials. If you want VeeDub type quality differentials,
look at alternate brands based on the same chassis and parts that have
lower brand image such as Seat or lower, search for VAG group common
chassis or similar terms.

Ah, like Seat, Skoda etc? My Dad has been driving VW's for a long time
now and has not really had any problems, hence me wanting to get one too
but I am happy to look at others based on the same chasis like you said.

Yep, they're all part of the VW audi group and they make huge economies
of scale by using common parts across many ranges. I'd certainly
consider Seat vs VW but don't know how many corners get cut as they drop
to Skoda etc. That said, lots of licensed private hire cars around here
are Skodas, they're bound to be doing a lot of miles and can't afford to
have cars off the road.

Similarly avoid brands with inflated servicing costs, particularly
those that require specialist tools for servicing (notably Citroen),
and self service or get it serviced in the back streets from a
carefully chosen garage.

I believe it's not really the best practice to get it serviced at a main
dealer?

While I would normally put Toyotas in the high service cost band I
have one rellie who bought a 6-12mth old ex driving school Yaris a few
years back and is very happy with it, no probs on longish trips.
Another has had no probs with a similar Corsa (although watch out for
inflated purchase price due to laddish popularity).

As another has said, get a list of cars in the lowest insurance groups
and make your first choice from them, if you're young then the ongoing
savings there will likely outweigh most savings in initial purchase
price.


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, I know what you mean, I think the body metal is thinner so can
sound tinny and can mark more easily in car park door opening dings.
They also have drier weather out there so for a while didn't really
understand about rustproofing the way europeans did/do. I have however
used loads of long lived japanese cars and they don't seem to fall apart
but the ancillaries just seem to get tatty quite quickly.
--
fred
it's a ba-na-na . . . .

In article , Andrew Gabriel
writes
In article ,
Fredxx writes:
On 23/02/2012 22:43, fred wrote:

I think the tax on benefits in kind associated with company car
provision far outweigh any saving achieved, that was certainly the case
when I made choices on such matters.

Taxable benefits don't take into account the insurance premium for a
teenager, so might be a cost effective solution.

That was my thinking. ~15 years ago, I was working with lots of
young computer programmers (although mostly older than 25), and
anyone interested in a sporty car took the company car option,
because you would never be able to afford the insurance yourself.
OTOH, if you just wanted a Ford Fiesta, it was cheaper not to use
the company car option.

I think it was about 15yrs ago that the rules changed to base the hmrc
benefit on a proportion of the new value of the car you chose. I think
it was about a third of the new price each year (w/o any allowance for
depreciation) so if you had an 18k car you had a benefit loading of 6k
per year, every year that you had the benefit. Same thing if you bought
a 5yo car that cost 18k new, you got hit with a benefit of 6k no matter
what the age. For those who had a choice, coy cars went out of vogue in
short order.

I switched to personal ownership plus mileage.
--
fred
it's a ba-na-na . . . .

On 24/02/2012 14:17, Dave Liquorice wrote:
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 was still at university, but, when I worked out what a state pension
would buy, thought it was worth starting a private pension scheme with
whatever I could afford at the time.

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.

This is where it is important to get an independent financial advisor to
match the investments to your aversion to risk. I would not dream of
rebalancing the holdings every year. I fully expect the high risk
investments to take a fairly heavy hit at the beginning and seeing that
in black and white (or red) every year might tempt me to get out of them
before the long term gains start to kick in.

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...

There are other pension schemes that would allow that. My main pension
is from a small self-managed scheme, which allowed me (with the
statutory requirement of approval from a pension provider after Robert
Maxwell fell off his boat) to make loans and to buy property, as well as
making more conventional investments.

Colin Bignell

Andrew May wrote:
On 24/02/2012 10:06, Nightjar wrote:

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


Getting of topic now but does anyone know what the recommended pension
pot is nowadays? £1m in the bank would produce something like £10,000 in
interest if you are lucky. An annuity, hopefully a bit better.



£1m in the bank will give you 20 years of £50k without interest at all..

On 24/02/2012 14:37, Andrew May wrote:

Getting of topic now but does anyone know what the recommended pension
pot is nowadays? £1m in the bank would produce something like £10,000 in
interest if you are lucky. An annuity, hopefully a bit better.

You can also take a drawdown pension which should yield more than an
annuity. The amount you can take depends upon the size of the pot and
the current Gilt Index Yield. Look at this page for more details and for
a calculator to help you estimate what you need, but bear in mind that
the rules and the Gilt Index Yield change.

http://www.invidion.co.uk/pension_fu...calculator.php

Colin Bignell

On 24/02/2012 14:58, fred wrote:
....
Yep, they're all part of the VW audi group and they make huge economies
of scale by using common parts across many ranges. I'd certainly
consider Seat vs VW but don't know how many corners get cut as they drop
to Skoda etc. That said, lots of licensed private hire cars around here
are Skodas, they're bound to be doing a lot of miles and can't afford to
have cars off the road.
....

Skoda suddenly became very popular for minicabs when they introduced an
unlimited mileage guarantee. I believe they have modified it now.

Colin Bignell

On 23/02/12 23:38, gremlin_95 wrote:
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.

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.

My 18 year old Twingo went to the scrapyard last month after more than
150,000 miles. Mechanically fine but the cost of the welding neded to
pass the MOT meant evn I had to accept it was uneconomic. Replaced with
a Citroën C2, which is probably more frugal on fuel, but is slightly
larger outside, much smaller inside and has a poorer power to weight ration.

At least cars these days don't rust as much as they used to the Renault
5 I had from new in the late 70's had visible rust after just five years.

My advice would be that high mileage is ok provided it has been used for
long steady journeys rather that in-town start-stop, and a few minor
dents, so long as they don't rust, are part of the character.

But you probably need to start by looking at insurance quotes. Quotes
for the C2, which is supposed to be group 1 etc for a 57 year with 15+
years NCD etc ranged from £300 to over £1200. As a young driver,
insurance may cost you more than the car.



--
djc

Nightjar wrote:
On 24/02/2012 14:58, fred wrote:
...
Yep, they're all part of the VW audi group and they make huge economies
of scale by using common parts across many ranges. I'd certainly
consider Seat vs VW but don't know how many corners get cut as they drop
to Skoda etc. That said, lots of licensed private hire cars around here
are Skodas, they're bound to be doing a lot of miles and can't afford to
have cars off the road.
...

Skoda suddenly became very popular for minicabs when they introduced an
unlimited mileage guarantee. I believe they have modified it now.


The non turbo diesel skoda engine - think it was a 1400 - was absolutely
the best ever cab diesel. Gutless but frugal in the extreme. LOVED
idling at a small fuel consumption. Loved being light footed around
towns. Lated FOREVER with no turbo..

Sadly they don't make it any more.


Colin Bignell

On 24/02/2012 14:49, tony sayer wrote:
In , Andrew May
scribeth thus
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.

Umm it has two ends sure .. so which end

The end which is not the Cambridge end. Dunno about the road it Ipswich
I have no reason to go there :-)

Jim K wrote:
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...

When my wife left me I kept her as a named driver on my policy for several
years as it made my insurance cheaper.

--
Adam

tony sayer wrote:
In article , Andrew May
scribeth thus
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.

Umm it has two ends sure .. so which end

The one that does not end in Rome:-)

--
Adam

In article ,
ARWadsworth wrote:
Jim K wrote:
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...

When my wife left me I kept her as a named driver on my policy for
several years as it made my insurance cheaper.

exactly the opposite here. when I took my wife's name off my policy and
made it for myself only, I got a significant saving. (She'd never driven
the car in 9 years, since she drives an auto and I have a manual)

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.16

charles wrote:
In article ,
ARWadsworth wrote:
Jim K wrote:
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...

When my wife left me I kept her as a named driver on my policy for
several years as it made my insurance cheaper.

exactly the opposite here. when I took my wife's name off my policy
and made it for myself only, I got a significant saving. (She'd
never driven the car in 9 years, since she drives an auto and I have
a manual)

I was gobsmacked when putting her on my policy made it cheaper in the first
place!

I thought that putting an 18 year old non UK citizen with only a provisional
license on my policy would actually cost me more.

And for the record, that is the ONLY time she saved me any money.

--
Adam

In article ,
Huge writes:
On 2012-02-24, 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. 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.

Hear, hear. Start sooner. Save more.

I recall working out many years ago that for each 7 years delay
in starting to contribute to your pension, you need to double
your contributions for the rest of your career to make up that
loss. Mind you, that was when pension funds were doing better
than they now are.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

In article ,
tony sayer writes:
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..

There's another one which was discussed on the radio a week or
so back. They use the analogy of a fuel tank, but you fill it
with insurance premium payment instead. The black box monitors
driving style, distance, etc, and drains the insurance premium
tank at an appropriate rate. It also gives some semi-instant
feedback so you know what's expensive, and more detailed
feedback on their website. You have to top up the insurance
premium fuel tank as it runs out. I guess it might stop you
from starting the car if it completely runs out, but that
wasn't stated, or maybe it auto-tops up by direct debit.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

In message , Fredxx
writes
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.

Taxable benefits only to apply to high earners which according to HMRC
is - wait for it- over £8500 p.a. It has never been uprated since first
introduced.
--
hugh

In message , Nightjar
writes
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
Well the new rules on SIPS mean I can't get at all of mine even though
I've retired.
Save money but not in a pension fund unless you are offered a final
salary scheme or a very large employer contribution.
--
hugh

In message , Nightjar
writes
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
I think he was referring to an Additional driver, which is quiet
legitimate and produces an actuarial advantage. Add in my wife to my
policies reduce the premium even though the vehicles are manuals and she
only has an auto licence.
--
hugh

In message , charles
writes
In article ,
ARWadsworth wrote:
Jim K wrote:
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...

When my wife left me I kept her as a named driver on my policy for
several years as it made my insurance cheaper.

exactly the opposite here. when I took my wife's name off my policy and
made it for myself only, I got a significant saving. (She'd never driven
the car in 9 years, since she drives an auto and I have a manual)

Which just goes to show it pays to shop around - every year.
--
hugh

In message , gremlin_95
writes
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 ...
Where did we go wrong :-(
--
hugh

In message , tony sayer
writes
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.

Simple statistics. Under 25 males have highest probability of accident,
and highest claim value, often due to fatalities.
Much maligned oldies like me get cheaper insurance because we have lower
accident rates. It's all mathematical.
I think the answer lies somewhere in "compensation claim lawyers" at the
end of the day;!....

They just push up the rates for everyone - and the crazy thing is the
insurance companies encourage them - because they get commission for
passing on the details.





--
hugh

In message o.uk, Dave
Liquorice writes
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?

As long as they don't see "21/4 litre, 17 year old" and panic.
Also they are not economical, even when converted to gas.
--
hugh

"gremlin_95" wrote in message
...
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

--
David

Japanese.

On 24/02/2012 12:22 PM, Davey wrote:
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 10:07:53 -0000
wrote:
y Triumph Herald was a good choice.


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.


A bonnet that came up with the wings mad working on the engine a breeze.

Real solid wood dash & door cappings ... rubber bumpers (ideal for 1st car)
Only let me down once when hardy-spice coupling failed, and car simply
squatted down in middel of a road junction ....
Jacked side of car up so it was balancing on 2 wheel and replaced
coupling in about an hr ... cars were much simpler then.

I loved my Herald .... wish I'd kept it but at 18 you are keen to move
on ... if I remember the sequence of first few cars it was..

Triumph Herald 1965
Vauxhall Viva HA 1969
Morris 1300 1972
Volkswagen Beetle 1973
Triumph 1500 1974
Simca 1500 ?
Cortina Mk III 1976
Cortina Mk IV 1978
Cortina Mk V 1982

.... all probably now well scrapped and made into something else

On 23/02/2012 23:02, Fredxx wrote:

Taxable benefits don't take into account the insurance premium for a
teenager, so might be a cost effective solution.

+1. About 20 times.

Insurance at that age is likely to be more than the cost of the car.
Think thousands. Possibly up to 4K.

If you can get a company vehicle out of them do it. Anything! Take a
pay cut. Heck, go for minimum wage!

Now (puts on Dad hat) remember that the other driver is out to kill you.
Not all of them, not even most of them, but a few of them. Like the
one who hit my son - he went through the green light on the pedestrian
crossing, and thought it meant he could drive straight onto the
roundabout 50 yards later. I'd probably have dodged, my son with
limited experience didn't. It moved a suspension tower and wrote the
car off. Luckily he now has a company car...

Andy

On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 21:32:00 +0000
Rick wrote:

On 24/02/2012 12:22 PM, Davey wrote:
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 10:07:53 -0000
wrote:
y Triumph Herald was a good choice.


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.


A bonnet that came up with the wings mad working on the engine a
breeze.

Real solid wood dash & door cappings ... rubber bumpers (ideal for
1st car) Only let me down once when hardy-spice coupling failed, and
car simply squatted down in middel of a road junction ....
Jacked side of car up so it was balancing on 2 wheel and replaced
coupling in about an hr ... cars were much simpler then.

I loved my Herald .... wish I'd kept it but at 18 you are keen to
move on ... if I remember the sequence of first few cars it was..

Triumph Herald 1965
Vauxhall Viva HA 1969
Morris 1300 1972
Volkswagen Beetle 1973
Triumph 1500 1974
Simca 1500 ?
Cortina Mk III 1976
Cortina Mk IV 1978
Cortina Mk V 1982

... all probably now well scrapped and made into something else

Yes, I had lots of fun in mine, it was my main car for many years. I
sold it when I moved to the US, many others had come and gone in the
meantime, mostly while at engineering university. Now I'm back home, and
have a Renault!
--
Davey.

On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 21:53:37 +0000, Andy Champ
wrote:

On 23/02/2012 23:02, Fredxx wrote:

Taxable benefits don't take into account the insurance premium for a
teenager, so might be a cost effective solution.

+1. About 20 times.

Insurance at that age is likely to be more than the cost of the car.
Think thousands. Possibly up to 4K.

If you can get a company vehicle out of them do it.

I think it rather unlikely that a brand new apprentice would be given
a company car :-)

--
Frank Erskine

On 24/02/2012 20:14, hugh wrote:
In message , gremlin_95
writes
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 ...
Where did we go wrong :-(

What do you mean?

--
David

"hugh" ] wrote in message
...

I think he was referring to an Additional driver, which is quiet
legitimate and produces an actuarial advantage. Add in my wife to my
policies reduce the premium even though the vehicles are manuals and she
only has an auto licence.

Are you sure that doesn't invalidate the insurance.
Additional drivers are normally expected to be able to drive the vehicle.
She doesn't have a license valid for that vehicle and every insurance I have
seen says you need one.
Maybe you put her down as a provisional license for that vehicle?

On Feb 24, 9:31*am, Nightjar
wrote:
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

No he f===ing-hell won't if it's being contested in the courts. The
insurance companies hold all the cards, it is for them to make the
distinctions clear else a court should favour the generally-acepted
term as used by a commoner. It's precisely the airy-fairy
defenintions the insurance companies use to devalue claims. They are
CROOKS! Take them to court, everytime, they'll pay up and pay costs
at the door.

On Feb 24, 8:57*am, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
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

Perhaps you shouldn't advertise you drive over the ton.

On Feb 24, 1:25*am, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
gremlin_95 wrote:
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 ...

Oh blimey.

In that case look at insurance FIRST. Unfortunately these cheap *but
insurable for less than annual salary boxes are often not great for
motorway use. A van might help here.

My first vehicle was a van. insurance was cheap and you can occasionally
make a bit of cash shifting stuff and people around.

and if it's not been crunched, still fetch a reasonble resale even at
15 years unlike el cheapo eurobox.

Off the record. Of course.

On Feb 24, 11:29*am, tony sayer wrote:
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;!....


The compensation is set by the court and there are minimum rates
payable for specified, verified injuries. These rates may be
increased if the claimant goes through with court proceedings. I've
had crunches, but only to my own vehicle and I've not had any
influence for any other claim. Vehicle repairs are straightforward,
even if an insurer sends a loss-adjuster, the claimant still should
claim for the full amount and any out-of-pocket expenses.

On Feb 23, 11:27*pm, gremlin_95 wrote:
On 23/02/2012 22:47, Newshound wrote:







On 23/02/2012 22:08, Doctor Drivel wrote:

"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.

VWs should be reliable but not so cheap to fix if they go wrong. Most
things Japanese are likely to be as reliable and cheaper; no problem
with Toyota or Honda, but I've also had good Nissans and Daihatsus,
and Which talk highly of low end Mazdas. But TBH the large volume
stuff is mostly pretty good: Focus, Astra, etc. Avoid higher spec
stuff, particularly French. One of my kids is having endless trouble
with a Pug 307 fancy diesel.

My mechanic says steer clear of common rail, go for slightly older
stuff. I'm currently running a 1.4 diesel Astra estate which I bought
with about 80k on an 03 plate (Isuzu engine) for less than £3k, gives
almost 60 mpg on urban or motorway, and looks like running forever.

Either go for something very cheap, so that you can throw it away if
it gets silly (don't forget that it's likely to be worth £150 just for
scrap), or something respectable and boring.

If insurance is a big issue, look at low rating things like Micras,
Pandas, etc.

Thank you, whilst on Pug, I am learning to drive in a 308 HDI...it broke
down on my first lesson, though this was just after it was serviced by
the main dealer and they apparently drained the battery,

There are independant specialists which will give more reliable
service, look to the Peugoet Motoring Club(for instance) or whatever
their preferred monicker is to see if there is an independant
specializing in your area of choice. This applies across all brands
and usually equates to two blokes who are qualified vehicle
technicians with specific understanding to the brand. You'll pay a
fraction of the cost of a main dealer because the independant can work
much more efficiently.

gremlin_95 wrote:

On 24/02/2012 20:14, hugh wrote:

gremlin_95 writes

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 ...

Where did we go wrong :-(

What do you mean?

I think he's wishing *all* teenagers would get off their arses, find an
apprenticeship and a day-release course, not expect M&D to buy them a
car and be willing to find extra work to pay for one instead ...

Keep at it, you should do well ...

In article , Davey
scribeth thus
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.

Dunno nowadays . I can buy a ticket here in Cambridge to go to London
use the underground and busses for less now that its going to cost to
run my car there put up with the congestion and then more often than not
pay to park it and the congestion charge fee....



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

--
Tony Sayer

When my wife left me I kept her as a named driver on my policy for
several years as it made my insurance cheaper.

exactly the opposite here. when I took my wife's name off my policy and
made it for myself only, I got a significant saving. (She'd never driven
the car in 9 years, since she drives an auto and I have a manual)

Which just goes to show it pays to shop around - every year.

Thats what people in the UK just don't do they tend to stick with the
same Gas, Leccy, phone and banks year in year out so they can be
fleeced;(....


--
Tony Sayer