Your experience with Roojai.com online auto insurance

[CharlieH]

I dont get why you cant get the value of a replacement as the insured value?? 

Take a car 1yr old cost 700+ and insured value is only 420k ??? So if the car is written off or stolen you take a huge hit !! Doesnt that defeat the purpose ?

[KittenKong]

8 minutes ago, giddyup said:

How much were you paying before to save 6000K? The most I ever paid was 20,000K on a brand new car, it would have been highly unlikely to find an insurer who would have covered me for 14,000K. After 4 years I now pay 10,000K.

I got my premium down to around 10,000B from around 19,000B thanks to many optional deductions and also the vehicle being older and worth less. Roojai's quote for the same cover is about 4,000B cheaper again. So if I went with them now I would indeed save about 40% for what appears to be similar cover.

But my main questions are still there: how long does it take their agent to arrive at an accident, and do they pay up properly for honest claims?

[giddyup]

4 minutes ago, KittenKong said:

I got my premium down to around 10,000B from around 19,000B thanks to many optional deductions and also the vehicle being older and worth less. Roojai's quote for the same cover is about 4,000B cheaper again. So if I went with them now I would indeed save about 40% for what appears to be similar cover.

But my main questions are still there: how long does it take their agent to arrive at an accident, and do they pay up properly for honest claims?

Was the value of the vehicle the same for both insurers? I could probably get mine down to 5000K if I was prepared to take a write-off value of 200,000K instead of 450,000K.

[KittenKong]

11 minutes ago, CharlieH said:

I dont get why you cant get the value of a replacement as the insured value?? 

Take a car 1yr old cost 700+ and insured value is only 420k ??? So if the car is written off or stolen you take a huge hit !! Doesnt that defeat the purpose ?

Because many people here would be happy to ask their brother-in-law to steal their car if they thought they could get a new one on the insurance. Fraud is rife and goes largely unreported and unpunished.

 

That said, I dont think that the insured value would drop as fast as you say. My vehicle is 6+ years old and the insured value is still just over half the new cost. Though in fact that insured value is an average based on the assumption that my vehicle has been abused and badly maintained and has covered a lot of miles, none of which is true in my case. So my vehicle is probably worth a fair bit more than the average value of such a vehicle.

[KittenKong]

Just now, giddyup said:

Was the value of the vehicle the same for both insurers?

It was.

[giddyup]

17 minutes ago, CharlieH said:

I dont get why you cant get the value of a replacement as the insured value?? 

Take a car 1yr old cost 700+ and insured value is only 420k ??? So if the car is written off or stolen you take a huge hit !! Doesnt that defeat the purpose ?

If you could find an insurer to value it at 700K the premiums would be sky high. The other thing is that very few vehicles are either writ-offs or stolen, so why do you need to insure it for the value of a new replacement?

[giddyup]

2 minutes ago, KittenKong said:

It was.

Then you must have taken a hit on something else to save 40%, either that or you were paying through the nose initially.

[KittenKong]

13 minutes ago, giddyup said:

Then you must have taken a hit on something else to save 40%, either that or you were paying through the nose initially.

No. The 10,000B quote was already lower than most of the competition and had many optional deductions built in to keep the cost down (named driver only, leisure use only, secured overnight parking, high excess, dashcam).

 

The quote from Roojai which undercut it by 40% is presumably a result of cost-savings that they make by not having brokers and agents, and also because they go a step further in weeding out the bad risks. It makes sense to me.

[wgdanson]

As with most things in this world, YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR.  or do not pay for. And the Roadside Assistance is not FREE, it is INCLUDED in the price.

[CharlieH]

40 minutes ago, giddyup said:

If you could find an insurer to value it at 700K the premiums would be sky high. The other thing is that very few vehicles are either writ-offs or stolen, so why do you need to insure it for the value of a new replacement?

One of mine is 7 months old, if that got hit hy a truck and written off, I would be pretty pissed with 442k for a 700k car, thats what roojai quoted. Your dann right I woukd want it replaced, not get less than a 2nd hand car a few yrs old would cost.

[KittenKong]

51 minutes ago, CharlieH said:

One of mine is 7 months old, if that got hit hy a truck and written off, I would be pretty pissed with 442k for a 700k car, thats what roojai quoted.

Are you sure you entered the dates and model/type correctly? I would try again if I were you.

 

The insured value for my vehicle was identical from Roojai and AXA, and in both cases for my 6+ year old vehicle it was just over half the new price. So a similar reduction for a nearly new car would not make much sense.

[CharlieH]

10 minutes ago, KittenKong said:

Are you sure you entered the dates and model/type correctly? I would try again if I were you.

 

The insured value for my vehicle was identical from Roojai and AXA, and in both cases for my 6+ year old vehicle it was just over half the new price. So a similar reduction for a nearly new car would not make much sense.

Yep, did it again and still comes out at around a 30% shortfall in cover against cost 

[KittenKong]

58 minutes ago, CharlieH said:

Yep, did it again and still comes out at around a 30% shortfall in cover against cost 

I believe that a reduction of perhaps 10-20% is standard the instant the vehicle leaves the showroom. Seem to remember that mine had that also, even on the first year of "free" insurance offered by the manufacturer.

[jensmann]

is it true that roojai not accept over 70's?

try since 4 weeks to insure my 2006 isuzu.

first the system accepted it for T1. later they found out: only T2+ possible because too old.

then they wanted the proof of 50% NCB bonus, which i sent.

latest is that the "buy" function is blocked.

so far it took 4 weeks, about 30 emails and three phone calls.

today i wrote a mail to the MD to conplain. lets see what happens next.....

[giddyup]

On 12/20/2018 at 9:05 PM, jensmann said:

is it true that roojai not accept over 70's?

try since 4 weeks to insure my 2006 isuzu.

first the system accepted it for T1. later they found out: only T2+ possible because too old.

then they wanted the proof of 50% NCB bonus, which i sent.

latest is that the "buy" function is blocked.

so far it took 4 weeks, about 30 emails and three phone calls.

today i wrote a mail to the MD to conplain. lets see what happens next.....

True, they don't accept over 70's. I filled out the online questionaire only to find that out right at the end. Why don't they put that little disclaimer right up front instead of wasting people's time?

[jensmann]

True, they don't accept over 70's. I filled out the online questionaire only to find that out right at the end. Why don't they put that little disclaimer right up front instead of wasting people's time?

it's discriminating, isn't it?
any 30 year old alcoholic they will accept.
not to mention those millions of thais who can't drive properly.

[transam]

7 minutes ago, jensmann said:

it's discriminating, isn't it?
any 30 year old alcoholic they will accept.
not to mention those millions of thais who can't drive properly.

Roojai is trying to provide much cheaper insurance, the insurers they use have obviously agreed with a few exceptions to reduce their risk and older folk is a risk they don't want. Your drunk drivers will have void insurance..

[giddyup]

47 minutes ago, transam said:

Roojai is trying to provide much cheaper insurance, the insurers they use have obviously agreed with a few exceptions to reduce their risk and older folk is a risk they don't want. Your drunk drivers will have void insurance..

So are you saying there is a higher risk among the over 70's than young Thai male drivers? I'd like to see the statistics on that. 

[transam]

1 hour ago, giddyup said:

So are you saying there is a higher risk among the over 70's than young Thai male drivers? I'd like to see the statistics on that. 

Young Thai blokes PAY for their youngness, ask our lad...Old folk perhaps do not have the same reaction or comprehension stuff as young folk..I most certainly haven't and am not ashamed to reolise the fact..

[giddyup]

1 minute ago, transam said:

Young Thai blokes PAY for their youngness, ask our lad...Old folk perhaps do not have the same reaction or comprehension stuff as young folk..I most certainly haven't and am not ashamed to reolise the fact..

All I can say at 76 that I have had one accident since starting driving at 16 that wasn't my fault, none in nearly 9 years of driving in Thailand, so you can't lump all oldies in the same boat.

[transam]

1 minute ago, giddyup said:

All I can say at 76 that I have had one accident since starting driving at 16 that wasn't my fault, none in nearly 9 years of driving in Thailand, so you can't lump all oldies in the same boat.

You are just one, perhaps a % may tell a different story...????

[giddyup]

17 minutes ago, transam said:

You are just one, perhaps a % may tell a different story...????

If there are statistics, otherwise just conjecture. I still say if Roojai don't want to insure the over 70's say it up front instead of wasting people's time filling out the questionaire.

[jensmann]

agree.giddyup, we old folks should start fighting for our rights.
we got discriminated in many areas, like jobs, health insurance, now car insurance etc.
the world should realize that we are the voters of tomorrow.
how about "ME OLD" or "PAY US BACK" or "SOCIAL AGE".....

[jensmann]

agree.giddyup, we old folks should start fighting for our rights.
we got discriminated in many areas, like jobs, health insurance, now car insurance etc.
the world should realize that we are the voters of tomorrow.
how about "ME OLD" or "PAY US BACK" or "SOCIAL AGE".....

no 70: neither my two daughters nor my wife or extended family will ever buy roojai....

[JAS21]

3 hours ago, giddyup said:

All I can say at 76 that I have had one accident since starting driving at 16 that wasn't my fault, none in nearly 9 years of driving in Thailand, so you can't lump all oldies in the same boat.

Just one accident ... but how many have you caused ???? ... I will freely admit that at 73 years old my driving is not as good as it was in my younger days ... I hate wearing glasses to drive and find that it effects how quickly I can make judgements using the side mirrors. Of course in my younger days I didn't need rear view mirrors as no one ever overtook me ...............

[giddyup]

56 minutes ago, JAS21 said:

Just one accident ... but how many have you caused ???? ... I will freely admit that at 73 years old my driving is not as good as it was in my younger days ... I hate wearing glasses to drive and find that it effects how quickly I can make judgements using the side mirrors. Of course in my younger days I didn't need rear view mirrors as no one ever overtook me ...............

I still don't wear glasses to drive, only for reading, and if I can be accident free after 9 years of driving in Thailand I must be doing something right. I think it's called driving defensively.

[KittenKong]

18 hours ago, giddyup said:

True, they don't accept over 70's. I filled out the online questionaire only to find that out right at the end. Why don't they put that little disclaimer right up front instead of wasting people's time?

You may find that it isn't a blanket exclusion and only applies to certain combinations of applicant.

 

Plus of course by getting you to fill in the form completely they can harvest your personal information which may be of statistical use to them, or for marketing purposes.

[fittobethaied]

16 minutes ago, KittenKong said:

You may find that it isn't a blanket exclusion and only applies to certain combinations of applicant.

 

Plus of course by getting you to fill in the form completely they can harvest your personal information which may be of statistical use to them, or for marketing purposes.

 

 

Next year I will be over 70. Our car is in my wife's name and she is licensed, so I'll just list my wife as the primary driver....she's 55. Then, I will choose the coverage where only those over 30 are allowed to drive the car, so as an unnamed secondary driver I would qualify regardless of being over 70.

[giddyup]

1 hour ago, KittenKong said:

You may find that it isn't a blanket exclusion and only applies to certain combinations of applicant.

 

Plus of course by getting you to fill in the form completely they can harvest your personal information which may be of statistical use to them, or for marketing purposes.

Well, I don't know what I would have needed to do to be made an exception, no accidents and never made a claim, how good do you have to be?

[stevenl]

2 hours ago, fittobethaied said:

 

 

Next year I will be over 70. Our car is in my wife's name and she is licensed, so I'll just list my wife as the primary driver....she's 55. Then, I will choose the coverage where only those over 30 are allowed to drive the car, so as an unnamed secondary driver I would qualify regardless of being over 70.

Just make sure there is no age related exclusion in the policy conditions.