16 captured repliesPartial discussion capture · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHGT3 Insurance - Page 1 - 911/Carrera GT - PistonHeads UK
Leading reported evidence
Check needs/expectations marry up
Suggestion or failed attempt
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
That's not to knock mainstream insurers, just check your needs/expectations marry up with the policy documents.
Leading evidence: 'Check needs/expectations marry up' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Check needs/expectations marry up' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
My GT3 has been around £1-1.5k to insure that’s despite low miles, garage, tracker etc and clean full no claims on other vehicles.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion · Original poster
However, I believe all insurance companies are a load of shi*sters and never pay out what you think is the true value or enough to replace the loss.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
16 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
PistonHeads: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261027T031046Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Manning, who I have been insured with for many years are asking £576. Out of interest I went onto Compare the Market and was offered £128.
What am I missing?
Your thoughts would be appreciated.
TA
Cheap. UK insurance is not expensive compared to Germany. My 992 GTS was £1700 rising to £2500 in 3rd year I lived there. I am 65, low risk, miles, garage, etc. Oddly Allianz UK will not quote for my 911!
Edited by DC1960 on Monday 13th April 16:27
Edited by DC1960 on Monday 13th April 16:27
throt said:
You get what you pay, bud, in the event of yourself making a claim
I fully understand that and have always lived by that motto.
However, I believe all insurance companies are a load of shi*sters and never pay out what you think is the true value or enough to replace the loss. Why pay more than you need to?
lasuze said:
Manning, who I have been insured with for many years are asking £576. Out of interest I went onto Compare the Market and was offered £128.
What am I missing?
Your thoughts would be appreciated.
TA
That’s for a GT3? That’s insanely cheap
The cheapest I could get for my 991.2 GT3 was £995 with Classic Line,
Inlineonline said:
lasuze said:
Manning, who I have been insured with for many years are asking £576. Out of interest I went onto Compare the Market and was offered £128.
What am I missing?
Your thoughts would be appreciated.
TA
That s for a GT3? That s insanely cheap
The cheapest I could get for my 991.2 GT3 was £995 with Classic Line,
Tend to agree, not sure we have the full picture here? My GT3 has been around £1-1.5k to insure that’s despite low miles, garage, tracker etc and clean full no claims on other vehicles. Amazingly cheap if true though!
Imasurv said:
Inlineonline said:
lasuze said:
Manning, who I have been insured with for many years are asking £576. Out of interest I went onto Compare the Market and was offered £128.
What am I missing?
Your thoughts would be appreciated.
TA
That s for a GT3? That s insanely cheap
The cheapest I could get for my 991.2 GT3 was £995 with Classic Line,
Tend to agree, not sure we have the full picture here? My GT3 has been around £1-1.5k to insure that s despite low miles, garage, tracker etc and clean full no claims on other vehicles. Amazingly cheap if true though!
Same here I’m with Footman James think it was about £1,000
OK let me give you a bit of context here.
I'm 69 next birthday, live in Devon, myself only to drive with other cars at my disposal
2,000 miles per annum, £500 excess with £500 voluntary, garaged overnight, no claims or convictions
Value £75,000, maximum NCB
It was SAGA who quoted £128 pa
Thanks do £576 is cheap but not ridiculous for the 997, 991s are probably more likely to see track action and more expensive by at least 50%
But that saga quote seems very cheap.
Is it agreed value and any track day cover even at additional cost per day?
lasuze said:
However, I believe all insurance companies are a load of shi*sters and never pay out what you think is the true value or enough to replace the loss. Why pay more than you need to?
Then you've answered your own question about who to insure with.
FYI, many specialist brokers give Agreed Value. But maybe read the policy docs and decide
Inlineonline said:
Thanks do £576 is cheap but not ridiculous for the 997, 991s are probably more likely to see track action and more expensive by at least 50%
They will also be more expensive to repair….most have LED headlights…991.2 rear lid and wing is carbon etc etc. I’d imagine part prices get very expensive very quickly. 991’s probably have more cars with PCCB’s etc
Just to share that when I was with a well-known insurer it came to light that when assessing total-loss value they did not factor options. As we all know, the options on a lot of models can have a material impact on the value some cars command in the market and decided if the worst happened it could then be a difficult convo.
There were some other complexities with how options had to be declared so in the end it was much simpler to go with a specialist policy, get an agreed value and actually talk to someone who understood specialist cars. That's not to knock mainstream insurers, just check your needs/expectations marry up with the policy documents.
Sounds like a win I'd be taking the £128 price.
I'm of the same view with insurance companies and provided it has the cover I need I go with the lowest price.
SV_WDC said:
Just to share that when I was with a well-known insurer it came to light that when assessing total-loss value they did not factor options. As we all know, the options on a lot of models can have a material impact on the value some cars command in the market and decided if the worst happened it could then be a difficult convo.
There were some other complexities with how options had to be declared so in the end it was much simpler to go with a specialist policy, get an agreed value and actually talk to someone who understood specialist cars. That's not to knock mainstream insurers, just check your needs/expectations marry up with the policy documents.
Sounds like Admiral. I binned them as an insurer twenty years ago when I realised their pay out in the event of a total loss claim was for a base spec car despite asking for a full list of options when insuring the car.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.