Covid-19 restrctions drive down motor insurance claims by 20%

THE number of motor insurance claims settled by insurers fell by nearly a fifth annually in 2020 as fewer cars were on the roads during the coronavirus lockdowns.

The number of claims settled last year stood at 2.1m, marking a 19% decrease compared with 2019, the Association of British Insurers (ABI) said.

Total payouts, at £8.3bn, reduced by 6% compared with the previous year.

The ABI said the declines reflect the impact of the lockdowns, with reduced road usage.

The overall average value of a claim paid was £4,000, up from £3,400 in 2019. The 17% increase on 2019 reflected rises in average personal injury and vehicle repair cost claims, the ABI said.

During 2020, the average personal injury payout increased by 13% on the previous year to £12,100. The average price paid for private comprehensive motor insurance was £465 in 2020, remaining at a four-year low.

The ABI said support for motorists during the coronavirus pandemic has included extending until April 30 a pledge that if someone must drive to and from their workplace because of the impact of Covid-19, their insurance policy will not be affected.

There is also a pledge until April 30 that if someone uses their own car for voluntary purposes to transport medicines or groceries to support others who are impacted by Covid-19, their cover will not be affected. This applies to all categories of NHS Volunteer Responders, including transporting patients, equipment, or other essential supplies, as well as volunteers assisting with the vaccine rollout.

Insurers have been discussing with customers any options for adjusting policies and premiums to reflect fewer miles being driven during the lockdowns, as well as options for those concerned about being able to continue paying their premiums by instalments due to the pandemic.

The ABI said one insurer has refunded £110 million to its car and van insurance customers, reflecting fewer journeys made during the lockdowns.

MANY years ago in the Belfast Telegraph, your political journalist Barry White, in response to Martin Mcguinness, stated that, “Martin Mcguinness had every right to campaign for a united Ireland, but he didn’t have the right to act as if it had already happened.” That truth has stuck in my mind all these years.

Edmond Byrne (Write Back, March 8) seems to take the same stance as Martin Mcguinness and gives a long quote about parity of esteem and equality, but then goes on to insult unionists by accusing them of undermining the Belfast Agreement.

Like so many non-unionists, he reads the Agreement as a one-sided document, guaranteeing the nationalist position, while any discontent from unionists can be dismissed as an “inconvenient truth” that they have to put up with.

Because the Agreement allows citizens to declare as citizens of a foreign state, he tells me that it is not British.

Of course, he then throws unionist opinion the bone that it can’t be exclusively Irish, either, in a united Ireland. I look forward to how that conundrum is addressed in the coming border argument.

What he does not address is that the Northern Ireland Protocol is the result of his government using the threat of a return to terrorism and the EU using the Agreement as a convenient tool in the Brexit negotiations.

The result being that all the people of Northern Ireland are shackled with all the problems of the Protocol, while he can sit in Cork and tell me to put up with it while the Republic has no responsibility to monitor its own border and goes merrily on its way without hindrance. Mr Byrne equates genuine concerns with “showing their true colours” (whatever that means), while the only one showing their “true colours” was the EU, when they closed the real border to vaccine supplies.

What happened to the Belfast Agreement and the Protocol when it suited and push came to shove?

RAYMOND HUGHES Ballyclare, Co Antrim