I’m not a big fan of such companies and I’ve heard of stories of people who were lured into signing up for insurances and sometimes even long-term contracts, or insurance based 3a solutions who greatly regretted it afterwards.
I see a few problems:
You cannot get “independent advice” if you don’t pay directly for the advice. If they’re paid by partner companies their offerings will be biased and influenced through their own interests, e.g. through which company can make the most profit and not which solution makes the most sense for the customer.
Companies which partner together with other companies to create such B2B deals between each other, are usually large and expensive companies. So you won’t get the best offer which is out there on the market, you will get the best offer with which they can make the most profit out of their narrow selection of expensive large enterprise partners. There are usually smaller or online-only companies which have much better deals.
They will try to talk you into things you don’t need or want. Like: “how would you feel in case XY happens and the insurance pays everything” “Yeah, that would be great”. And you will end up being heavily overinsured.
Once they have your contact details you will be haunted by them, even though you’re not interested. Be ready to get called every few months just to “check-in and see if maybe your situation has changed in the meantime”.
I wouldn’t recommend it. I would rather do an “insurance check” myself and look out for really the best deal on the market and insure only things I really need.
Hi I know pretty well the company and the service. It wont be a real big insurance check its more a marketing story where they compare your current insurances to the offer they have and might consult you a little bit.
VZVersicherungsPool is the inhouse insurance which will be proposed if it makes sense.
So go and look what they offer, but treat it like meeting an agent from Axa or Mobiliar.
A real, in depth insurance risk check is not profitable for an expert if the customer is a private person - so never expect it for free to be a) really in depth and b) only focussed on your interessts.
I did it professionally and know exactly what I am talking about. Either its just a quick scan or a process with the objective of selling (limited by what the company can offer) - therefore it wont be focussed really on your interessts.
Thank you for the comments! That what I was expecting. If they can sort out our insurances and propose a couple of cheaper alternatives, it will be enough for me. Besides, all polices are standard, so I don’t think someone will actually read and synthetize what is there.
Yes, that’s what I meant above. Zurich is one of those large expensive corporates. I’ve just experimented a bit and I’ve easily found an insurance that is at least 400 CHF cheaper than Zurich for my car.
So what’s the point of using VZ with an expensive insurance company just to get a discount, if I can easily find a cheaper insurance on my own without VZ and without their discounts?
Did you read and compare all conditions? Taking care of my children, this kind of thing is rather low on my priorities list. So I want to delegate this task, for a reasonable potential margin if they get me as a customer.
If you are sure it’s the same, good for you.
I would think first before insuring with a no name company. Unlike bank packages, if you discover that your insurance has problems, it’s too late.
No of course, the conditions are not exactly the same. But companies tend to bloat their packages with things nobody needs. And many people seem to be striving for a zero risk society where everything is taken care of and they seem to be ready to throw endless money at it. It’s just not reasonable, but it’s a good business model claiming to provide more value. But do they really provide more value, or do they just provide things that are of no use for most people, to justify a higher price? Just imagine a typical workshop at such an insurance: What could we add into the package that costs as practically no money because nobody is going to claim it, but at the same time it justifies asking for a higher price?
When I sign up for a car insurance, I want them to pay in case of a car damage. I don’t want them to pay for the wellness retreat in case of a car accident and flying my relatives in with helicopters to visit me in the hospital including a six figure entertainment program with circus clowns and a cocktail party.
The no name companies are often not bad and have good ratings so people seem to be happy. Actually, I planned a trip last year and used two different portals to book flights and hotels. The flights were insured with one of the big companies and the hotels with a no name insurance. I couldn’t travel because of the lockdowns. The big insurance didn’t want to pay (still don’t have my money today), the smaller one paid. They are often more expensive because they have a lot of branch offices, pay large sums of bonuses, etc. and they’re not less prone to risk. Let’s remind ourselves that it was UBS who nearly went bankrupt in 2008, not just a small no name bank in a village. Big names are not always automatically better.
What’s wrong with Assura? I don’t use them myself because they’re not the cheapest but some people I know use them and they seem to be happy with it. Yes, you can’t expect the same services from them like from an insurance where you pay double the price, but is it really worth to throw thousands of CHF every year at things just to increase the comfort a bit in an event that anyway has a small likelihood to occur? I mean, do I really need to pay maybe 100’000 CHF - 200’000 CHF in a lifetime more for a bit more comfort in an event that happens very rarely? Or will I accept a bit of discomfort in such an event for a few days whereas the actual need is still taken care of (paying for car damage, or hospital, etc.)?
It’s somehow funny to see that in a forum where people are quite happy to take risks in terms of investments but at the same they are very risk averse in all other cases, trying to mitigate away every smallest amount of risk or even a bit of discomfort in events that happen very rarely, by throwing money at it.
I don’t want to say it’s generally a bad thing to do, if someone really wants all that additional security and comfort, and is willing to pay for it. Feel free to. But then I recommend reading the reviews of those companies to see if in the end you likely will get what you hoped and paid for, or if in the end, the big corporation is even more scrupulous.
Because I signed 5 years contrats that end in 2023. With VZ I am able to get a discount until contracts end and then I will analyze their offers and publicly available offers that I can find on my side. This will be an additional option.
Be careful with taking always the cheapest and read the general conditions, especially for brand new cars.
What is your cheapest insurance ? Would be interesting to compare contracts.
Don’t know if it’s still the cheapest now but when I got it it was. I’m with Smile Direct. You can customise it online so you can get rid of all the options you don’t need and get an even better price. That’s what I like about them, you can really customise everything exactly how you want it and don’t need to pay for things you don’t need or want.
When I bought the car I had a fully comprehensive insurance with bonus protection & gross negligence with them, now it’s only partially comprehensive & liability. Once the car gets older I’ll probably switch to liability only.
If you need the insurances offered (i.e. supplemental health insurance, full casco car insurance), I would say it’s worth checking out. The premiums are favorable. The problem is that you are limited to offers from their partner(s), which may or may not include the specific coverages you need (particularly relevant for health insurance).
Since the insurance check service is free, there’s no harm in getting quotes whch you can then compare with other offers on the market.
That may certainly be, however, the key with Smile Direct is, that you can remove all the useless things you don’t need, and you can choose higher franchises. Other insurances are not that flexible and they let you usually only chose between 3 models containing things most people don’t need.
Insurances are made to cover unexpected high costs / peaks, not the usual 200-500 CHF which you could easily cover by yourself. For small amounts it’s better not to have an insurance at all, save that money, and in case of an event pay it out of your own pocket. So I want an insurance to step in when it costs me about several thousands of CHF, everything else I don’t need.
I run an example on Smile online with my car if I would still have a fully comprehensive insurance, they offer me an insurance for 924.70 CHF, after optimising it and removing all the things I don’t need and increasing my franchise, it’s now 490.90 CHF, still fully comprehensive insurance including bonus protection on both full and partial comprehensive and covering gross negligence. That’s a huge difference and with other insurances you can’t do that.
It’s not worth paying for an insurance for things where you can easily cover costs by yourself. If you pay for insurances that cover costs you could easily cover by yourself, then you’re overinsured and basically wasting money.