You MUST have a 'box' installed before insuring you - wtf?
Discussion
Grab a 
warning long post!
Sad times are amongst us as for the younger, red blooded drivers, albeit not so much for the older generation.
When I was 17 I drove poorly and learnt the hard way from the consequences of my actions i.e. stacking it. Your first car was never expected to be a minter because it was likely that you would bin it at some time or other. Back in the day when I started to drive, (the 80's for me) there were fewer cars on the road, about 80% less foreign drivers, much slower cars, zero driver aids (ABS, traction control, launch control, and even power steering was rarely affordable on most of the cars we could get insured on). The basic technology was frightening compared to todays' machines, with cross-ply tyres, drum brakes and no crumple zones. Generally though, I thought there were better standards of driving which included lane control, less tailgating, and you could overtake pretty much anything without fear of being flashed. Drivers were more courteous and if they chose to drive slowly would not object if someone wanted to overtake to make progress.
Now wind the clock on some 35 years later and we have a completely different playing field of risk. The average runaround can muster 110mph fairly easy, and it's probable that it runs on diesel, it has tyres which have been handed down from F1 Technology, it's design includes a passenger safety cell, and it can stop almost instantly in either the wet or dry thanks to its clever onboard safety systems. In a modern car, it is unlikely that you will get to experiment with oversteer or understeer, to be able to lock the up the brakes or experience cadence braking commanded by the driver. You won't even be able to rev out your engine when standing still because the onboard nanny system will simply disallow it.
Now let's look at the modern insurance demographic (and personally I hate with a vengeance the excuses I receive for ridiculously over-inflated premiums, poor excuses, policy opt-outs and other restrictions that just remove any flexibility without paying through the nose for them) and compare it to the old model. There are now in excess of 31 MILLION cars on the roads in the UK ( source) that figure has ballooned out of proportion compared to back in the day. We now have drivers with less skills as the car does it for them. So less time and patience (overcrowded roads present more traffic and more stress) which in turn create greater risks. Now add to that a mix of high, fast moving technology which is changing like a fad or fashion and the wonders of the relentless ongoing computer age. Now sprinkle in some contentious speed cameras and you are left with a dumbed down automated state where motorists drive on auto-pilot without thinking about what they're doing because there is absolutely no thrill in driving anymore. Ooh I forgot the claims brigade who've learned a thing or two about fiddling courtesy of our lack immigration policies and the sorry state of litigation from our US counterparts - the whiplash, medical and legal expenses brigade...
So, here is a little black box that will track you, deny you any freedom from 'the system', will flag up whether it thinks you've gone round a bend too fast or braked too slowly, and unlike the TomTom tracker I had in my company vehicle, will send you an automated bill on the basis of criteria that no one really understands or is willing to fight, and all because it lowers your premium? I got called into our fleet management office a couple of years ago because the "Box did not like my driving". I listened patiently to the fleet managers report which consisted of a basic traffic light system of green (good boy), amber (poor driving) and red (dangerous practice) system. He advised me that I had been in the orange most of the time and in the red for an unacceptable amount of time. I asked him what car he drove out of work and his reply was, "I use the company car", he was a company man so my points about enjoying the car as a reward driving out in the country on open roads for enjoyment would be wasted on him and he wouldn't even be able to grasp the concept. This is the way this digital disease on motoring first appeared, courtesy of fleet management systems where a company is trying to reduce its costs and liability. To some extend it works in industry as it provides excellent statistics which in themselves support the use of black boxes, but of course they would, wouldn't they?
Going back to my conversation in the fleet managers' office, I asked him for a list of 'Red's. I had eleven in the one month so roughly three a week then. Eight of those were due to "Excessive G force during cornering". The associated speed with the heinous offence? Highest was 11mph and lowest was 6mph. How? By simply going around a mini-roundabout as the supporting journey line showed. Two were for excess speed and both of them on A roads which had no side roads joining them, perfectly clear line of sight, and in perfect weather (I know because I quoted this to him at the time). The last 'Red' was a sudden stop which happened in central London when I tried to avoid hitting a cyclist who decided to ride across the front of me during slow moving traffic. That timely prompt brought me on to discuss the weather and road conditions at the 'time of offence'. "So does this box take into consideration, traffic, weather conditions, road conditions, driver experience, time of day, and my work schedule? How does it adjust for the fact I've not had an accident in the last 20 years, have maximum no-claims bonus and zero convictions?" I spurted out, now starting to get tetchy that I was being monitored by a pocket calculator?, "I don't know" was the obvious answer.
This now brings me to my conclusion.
Who manages the KPI's or hit points for these little boxes? Answer: The company that makes them.
Who produces the statistics for these little boxes? Answer: The company that makes them.
Who regulates the industry that makes them, and ensures that the data is managed, and according to what criteria? Answer: The company that makes them!
Is our target demographic the same for businesses as it for individual drivers? I don't think so. I also don't think that these boxes will help drivers experience proper driving in any way regardless of whatever statistics are produced whether they be from a black box org or an insurance company. Therefore I loathe both equally; the insurance companies and the black box company are clearly banging the hell out of each other and the motorist is being bottom raped and no one seems mildly aware of it.
I'm one of the lucky few that didn't have these restrictions on our freedom or finances, and sadly the newer generation will never understand the reasons that makes the whole concept of the modern day money making, Dick Turpin machine totally wrong on a moral and ethical basis.. kerching, computer says you got it wrong again, you owe us £25 on top of your monthly premium.
"Dad, can you give me some help with this? I've got a big bill this month".
Liking taking candy from a baby, oh hang on
warning long post! Sad times are amongst us as for the younger, red blooded drivers, albeit not so much for the older generation.
When I was 17 I drove poorly and learnt the hard way from the consequences of my actions i.e. stacking it. Your first car was never expected to be a minter because it was likely that you would bin it at some time or other. Back in the day when I started to drive, (the 80's for me) there were fewer cars on the road, about 80% less foreign drivers, much slower cars, zero driver aids (ABS, traction control, launch control, and even power steering was rarely affordable on most of the cars we could get insured on). The basic technology was frightening compared to todays' machines, with cross-ply tyres, drum brakes and no crumple zones. Generally though, I thought there were better standards of driving which included lane control, less tailgating, and you could overtake pretty much anything without fear of being flashed. Drivers were more courteous and if they chose to drive slowly would not object if someone wanted to overtake to make progress.
Now wind the clock on some 35 years later and we have a completely different playing field of risk. The average runaround can muster 110mph fairly easy, and it's probable that it runs on diesel, it has tyres which have been handed down from F1 Technology, it's design includes a passenger safety cell, and it can stop almost instantly in either the wet or dry thanks to its clever onboard safety systems. In a modern car, it is unlikely that you will get to experiment with oversteer or understeer, to be able to lock the up the brakes or experience cadence braking commanded by the driver. You won't even be able to rev out your engine when standing still because the onboard nanny system will simply disallow it.
Now let's look at the modern insurance demographic (and personally I hate with a vengeance the excuses I receive for ridiculously over-inflated premiums, poor excuses, policy opt-outs and other restrictions that just remove any flexibility without paying through the nose for them) and compare it to the old model. There are now in excess of 31 MILLION cars on the roads in the UK ( source) that figure has ballooned out of proportion compared to back in the day. We now have drivers with less skills as the car does it for them. So less time and patience (overcrowded roads present more traffic and more stress) which in turn create greater risks. Now add to that a mix of high, fast moving technology which is changing like a fad or fashion and the wonders of the relentless ongoing computer age. Now sprinkle in some contentious speed cameras and you are left with a dumbed down automated state where motorists drive on auto-pilot without thinking about what they're doing because there is absolutely no thrill in driving anymore. Ooh I forgot the claims brigade who've learned a thing or two about fiddling courtesy of our lack immigration policies and the sorry state of litigation from our US counterparts - the whiplash, medical and legal expenses brigade...
So, here is a little black box that will track you, deny you any freedom from 'the system', will flag up whether it thinks you've gone round a bend too fast or braked too slowly, and unlike the TomTom tracker I had in my company vehicle, will send you an automated bill on the basis of criteria that no one really understands or is willing to fight, and all because it lowers your premium? I got called into our fleet management office a couple of years ago because the "Box did not like my driving". I listened patiently to the fleet managers report which consisted of a basic traffic light system of green (good boy), amber (poor driving) and red (dangerous practice) system. He advised me that I had been in the orange most of the time and in the red for an unacceptable amount of time. I asked him what car he drove out of work and his reply was, "I use the company car", he was a company man so my points about enjoying the car as a reward driving out in the country on open roads for enjoyment would be wasted on him and he wouldn't even be able to grasp the concept. This is the way this digital disease on motoring first appeared, courtesy of fleet management systems where a company is trying to reduce its costs and liability. To some extend it works in industry as it provides excellent statistics which in themselves support the use of black boxes, but of course they would, wouldn't they?
Going back to my conversation in the fleet managers' office, I asked him for a list of 'Red's. I had eleven in the one month so roughly three a week then. Eight of those were due to "Excessive G force during cornering". The associated speed with the heinous offence? Highest was 11mph and lowest was 6mph. How? By simply going around a mini-roundabout as the supporting journey line showed. Two were for excess speed and both of them on A roads which had no side roads joining them, perfectly clear line of sight, and in perfect weather (I know because I quoted this to him at the time). The last 'Red' was a sudden stop which happened in central London when I tried to avoid hitting a cyclist who decided to ride across the front of me during slow moving traffic. That timely prompt brought me on to discuss the weather and road conditions at the 'time of offence'. "So does this box take into consideration, traffic, weather conditions, road conditions, driver experience, time of day, and my work schedule? How does it adjust for the fact I've not had an accident in the last 20 years, have maximum no-claims bonus and zero convictions?" I spurted out, now starting to get tetchy that I was being monitored by a pocket calculator?, "I don't know" was the obvious answer.
This now brings me to my conclusion.
Who manages the KPI's or hit points for these little boxes? Answer: The company that makes them.
Who produces the statistics for these little boxes? Answer: The company that makes them.
Who regulates the industry that makes them, and ensures that the data is managed, and according to what criteria? Answer: The company that makes them!
Is our target demographic the same for businesses as it for individual drivers? I don't think so. I also don't think that these boxes will help drivers experience proper driving in any way regardless of whatever statistics are produced whether they be from a black box org or an insurance company. Therefore I loathe both equally; the insurance companies and the black box company are clearly banging the hell out of each other and the motorist is being bottom raped and no one seems mildly aware of it.
I'm one of the lucky few that didn't have these restrictions on our freedom or finances, and sadly the newer generation will never understand the reasons that makes the whole concept of the modern day money making, Dick Turpin machine totally wrong on a moral and ethical basis.. kerching, computer says you got it wrong again, you owe us £25 on top of your monthly premium.
"Dad, can you give me some help with this? I've got a big bill this month".
Liking taking candy from a baby, oh hang on
naw said:
Here's an opinion on this from a black box policy holder. Insurance is not a physical asset, it's risk money, that vanishes into nowhere and doesn't buy you anything physically countable. So the extra 'quality' you get is not strictly related to how much you pay, like it would be for a book or a chair. Paying for personal freedom in principle is a great idea but for me this particular personal freedom (the freedom to drive in a risky manner) is just not worth the extra cost.
I'm also pretty sure that the black box does not record evidential-grade data, like a dash cam does, so the police cannot charge you for any misdemeanours recorded there. But I have no evidence for that.
I read a clause that there will be automatic fines/point allocated via these boxes. So the insurance database will link direct to the PNC and wow, instant fine, no personal interaction.I'm also pretty sure that the black box does not record evidential-grade data, like a dash cam does, so the police cannot charge you for any misdemeanours recorded there. But I have no evidence for that.
I do suppose you could get away with running a red with it I suppose!!! Unless they link the timing to the boxes data.
I think the next thing the government / insurers will suggest to keep us safe is remove tyres altogether and we run rails with a bumper front or rear of the car!
Scuffers said:
ok, what % of payouts are subject to court orders then?
my guess? less than 10%
Probably les than that but that still means 10000s every year. Given we know that a claim for whiplash is unwinnable excluding blatant fraud which is rare then we pay upfront. You see going tocoirtadds around another £10000 to a claim when all costs are factored in. So a simple £2500 case that we defend and lose costs £12500. Can you seethe economics?my guess? less than 10%
naw said:
Here's an opinion on this from a black box policy holder. Insurance is not a physical asset, it's risk money, that vanishes into nowhere and doesn't buy you anything physically countable. So the extra 'quality' you get is not strictly related to how much you pay, like it would be for a book or a chair. Paying for personal freedom in principle is a great idea but for me this particular personal freedom (the freedom to drive in a risky manner) is just not worth the extra cost.
Exactly. You've made a decision that suits you. Other people can make a decision to suit themselves. I cannot see the problem with this.People who say "you shouldn't be allowed the option of having a black box because eventually it'll mean we all have to have one" seem to wish to force what suits them onto others it doesn't suit because of something that may or may not happen years down the line. That's got to be wrong.
Ps. I haven't got a black box, but it's not my right to impose that view on others.
If i got forced to install one.. as soo as it was fitted i would sue the ins company for damaging my personal property and damaging its resale value as they have tampered with the electronics rendering it unreliable in the years to come.
once i win that, i would place it in the garage and wire it up to a car battery and never drive with it actually fitted
once i win that, i would place it in the garage and wire it up to a car battery and never drive with it actually fitted
SystemParanoia said:
If i got forced to install one.. as soo as it was fitted i would sue the ins company for damaging my personal property and damaging its resale value as they have tampered with the electronics rendering it unreliable in the years to come.
once i win that, i would place it in the garage and wire it up to a car battery and never drive with it actually fitted
I trust there is a woooooooosh parrot lurking within that once i win that, i would place it in the garage and wire it up to a car battery and never drive with it actually fitted
Wozy68 said:
Devil2575 said:
LoonR1 said:
And again, more tinfoil hattery.
How many times do I have to say this - if you don't want it then don't buy it. I don't like tomatoes, so I don't buy them, it really is that simple. Why is this so difficult for people to grasp?
Because paranio and fear of almost everything is quite common. How many times do I have to say this - if you don't want it then don't buy it. I don't like tomatoes, so I don't buy them, it really is that simple. Why is this so difficult for people to grasp?
Stupidity if you think it is.
Wozy68 said:
Because the rest of them were either fantasis or didnt keep an eye on you, this does. It will become the norm if we allow it too, and it will when more and more insurance companies bring it in and the chance to shop somewhere else diminishes.
No. It will only become the norm if there is no demand for insurance without it.If there is a demand for a product someone will supply it.
RDMcG said:
Look at what happened with speed cameras. Turned from the initial focus of safety to revenue tools.
Also there is a massive difference between a speed camera, designed to enforce a speed limit and a black box that you agree to have installed in order to reduce your insurance premium.
You are confusing consumer choice and law enforcement.
There seems to be a lot of black and white arguing here, whereas I suspect the long term result of these products will fit in a more grey area in between.
If they prove to be reasonably successful, they will become more prolific. There is no doubt about that.
The more prolific they become, the more products and pricing there will be related to it.
I agree there will always be a choice, quite simply as there will always be a customer demand for a non black box product - however it is inevitable that more common place the black boxes, the bigger the gulf in premiums will become for a wider audience.
End result - yes it won't be compulsory BUT the alternative will be at a higher price.
This follows the same pattern as current options - more and more policies don't include things we used to all take for granted (driving other cars, choice of bodyshop with no penalty, lower excesses etc.). I was quoted £1100 by Aviva at my renewal for a 3 car policy. My Private Client policy was £1700 for the same cars. I paid the premium as I like the protection it provides.
Choice will remain.... but at a cost!
If they prove to be reasonably successful, they will become more prolific. There is no doubt about that.
The more prolific they become, the more products and pricing there will be related to it.
I agree there will always be a choice, quite simply as there will always be a customer demand for a non black box product - however it is inevitable that more common place the black boxes, the bigger the gulf in premiums will become for a wider audience.
End result - yes it won't be compulsory BUT the alternative will be at a higher price.
This follows the same pattern as current options - more and more policies don't include things we used to all take for granted (driving other cars, choice of bodyshop with no penalty, lower excesses etc.). I was quoted £1100 by Aviva at my renewal for a 3 car policy. My Private Client policy was £1700 for the same cars. I paid the premium as I like the protection it provides.
Choice will remain.... but at a cost!
LoonR1 said:
Scuffers said:
ok, what % of payouts are subject to court orders then?
my guess? less than 10%
Probably les than that but that still means 10000s every year. Given we know that a claim for whiplash is unwinnable excluding blatant fraud which is rare then we pay upfront. You see going tocoirtadds around another £10000 to a claim when all costs are factored in. So a simple £2500 case that we defend and lose costs £12500. Can you seethe economics?my guess? less than 10%
SystemParanoia said:
If i got forced to install one.. as soo as it was fitted i would sue the ins company for damaging my personal property and damaging its resale value as they have tampered with the electronics rendering it unreliable in the years to come.
It costs £90 and tampers less with the electronics of the car than an ECU chip. They just plug it through some wires. I don't think there will be a system where people are forced to install one, as it would just be too easy to hack.
naw said:
It costs £90 and tampers less with the electronics of the car than an ECU chip. They just plug it through some wires.
I don't think there will be a system where people are forced to install one, as it would just be too easy to hack.
As i said. More than the value of my car lolI don't think there will be a system where people are forced to install one, as it would just be too easy to hack.
Scuffers said:
I don't dissagree with the numbers or taking a pragmatic view, but taking a step back, we all know its not right, but nobody seems to want to challenge it.
We challenge it a lot where we can. We also do a hell of a lot of lobbying of government. If you spent 5 mins googling ABI you'd see just how much we do. Of course of you'd rather believe otherwise then its your choice but wrong. Much like the views on black boxes becoming compulsory. SystemParanoia said:
We want results, not excuses 
Ban on referral fees? Reduction in charges by solicitors? Just tow things form the last few months. You want a thin end of the wedge? Well your insurers have finally got theirs by starting to get some traction on controlling injury claims. A box that rates your driving.
The day I accept that is the day the box can take into account every possible external factor affecting your driving - the dozy old bloke that caused you to emergency brake, the person travelling exceptionally fast around a corner that required you to accelerate quickly, and the animal you'd to swerve to avoid.
Yep. That'll be the day.
The day I accept that is the day the box can take into account every possible external factor affecting your driving - the dozy old bloke that caused you to emergency brake, the person travelling exceptionally fast around a corner that required you to accelerate quickly, and the animal you'd to swerve to avoid.
Yep. That'll be the day.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff