Bell Black Box - 3 months...

[Richyboy]

Surely once people start having these installed and the government cottons on, its goodbye pistonheads. The three month thing is probably just to get people interested.

[Terminator X]

R1 Indy said:

Mk3Spitfire said:

You'd be SAVING £1500? How much is it without that?

I would quite happily have a box if it saved me £1500.

Although that would mean my insurer paying me a fair chunk

I'd rather drive round in a stter for a few years on TPF&T to build up good no claims than install one of those hateful devices!

TX.

[btcc123]

I understand that a black box fitted to a car can lower the cost of young peoples insurance but if you shop around you may not need one.

I have just sorted my 17 year old sons insurance:

2003 Toyota Yaris 998cc.Value £1600
Son owner of the car,V5 in his name and has had a provisional licence for 2 months.
Policy in my sons name.
2 named drivers me and the wife.
£250 excess.
Fully conprehensive insurance.

Total price for a year £366.68 from Quinn Direct.

I do understand that when he passes his driving test the premium will likely increase.

[QBee]

btcc123 said:

.......some Interesting stuff.......

I do understand that when he passes his driving test the premium will likely increase.

By a factor of about 8, I suspect.

[Countdown]

btcc123 said:

I understand that a black box fitted to a car can lower the cost of young peoples insurance but if you shop around you may not need one.

I have just sorted my 17 year old sons insurance:

2003 Toyota Yaris 998cc.Value £1600
Son owner of the car,V5 in his name and has had a provisional licence for 2 months.
Policy in my sons name.
2 named drivers me and the wife.
£250 excess.
Fully conprehensive insurance.

Total price for a year £366.68 from Quinn Direct.

I do understand that when he passes his driving test the premium will likely increase.

My daughter has the same car. She passed 2 years ago and her 1st year's insurance without the BB was quoted as £2300. Having a BB fitted dropped it to just under £1500, and then after 1 year claim free it dropped to £600.

If it saves money it makes sense IMO.

[QBee]

He said the magic word "son" - unless they have brought in the new equality ruling properly, that means another £1000 on the premium because all girls except my good friend's daughter (two cars written off within three months of passing her test) are less of a risk than their testosterone-filled, mate-impressing counterparts in trousers

[berlintaxi]

Same here, my lad is insured with Bell and has a black box fitted on a 2013 KA, first year after he passed his test £1300, this year dropped to £700.

[blueg33]

Black box makes no sense to me.

My son passed his test last Feb aged 18. He is the main driver of a 100bhp Skoda Fabia 1.4. His first year insurance was £1700. The renewal has just come through at £544.

I found the policy by using a comparison website and selecting policies without telematics. Even in the first year his premium was less that many balck box policies.

Shop around, avoid the spy in the cab [tinfoil hat mode]Data can be retained and can be used against you[/tinfoil hat]

[TwigtheWonderkid]

QBee said:

He said the magic word "son" - unless they have brought in the new equality ruling properly, that means another £1000 on the premium because all girls except my good friend's daughter (two cars written off within three months of passing her test) are less of a risk than their testosterone-filled, mate-impressing counterparts in trousers

They did bring in the new equality ruling, about 3 years ago. There's no extra cost for males over females any more.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Terminator X said:

I'd rather drive round in a stter for a few years on TPF&T to build up good no claims than install one of those hateful devices!

TX.

Fine. That's the great thing about choice.

[blueg33]

Terminator X said:

R1 Indy said:

Mk3Spitfire said:

You'd be SAVING £1500? How much is it without that?

I would quite happily have a box if it saved me £1500.

Although that would mean my insurer paying me a fair chunk

I'd rather drive round in a stter for a few years on TPF&T to build up good no claims than install one of those hateful devices!

TX.

Going TPF&T makes virtually no difference to the premium for a new driver unless teh car is very expensive

[rs1952]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

MrBarry123 said:

fk that.

Not a chance of having a funny box thing installed in my car for the sake of £1,500.

For £1500, the claims manager could live in the boot!

When I had just turned 16 in June 1968, I went off in my best clothes to the local insurance broker to get insurance for my 1955 Francis Barnett 250cc 2-stroke bike.

TPF&T annual premium cost me £4..10..0d (that's £4.50 to our younger brethren ) A couple of years later when the thieving barstewards put the premium up to £9.00 I took my business elsewhere.

Things have move on a little since then, I presume...

[WatchfulEye]

allergictocheese said:

I've heard if you exceed 1g cornering they email you kiddy porn and tip off the feds.

I've come across a number of claims of people having their policies cancelled because of "aggressive cornering".

I suspect that there were probably other factors, but it's well worth checking the policy T&C to see whether your policy could be cancelled if the telematics data is unsatisfactory in some way.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

rs1952 said:

When I had just turned 16 in June 1968, I went off in my best clothes to the local insurance broker to get insurance for my 1955 Francis Barnett 250cc 2-stroke bike.

I thought you had to be 17 to ride a 250, even in 1968.

[supermono]

Are we at the dawning of the new era where insurance companies charging extra for speeding tickets get busted for profiteering. I mean nobody who's thought this through believes that habitual speeders would crash more, and the boxes will prove this. Look at everyone speeding happily up and down motorways for example. They might get tickets but they don't crash, not because of the speeding.

Maybe the boxes should be tied to the indicator stalks and the distance from the car in front, the tyre pressures, bulb condition, car condition, the eyeballs of the driver, etc, etc, then they can genuinely charge those who are dangerous.

Or here's a newsflash, charge people who crash more money.

Whatever, I do hope the speeding tax scam is up by this black box tech.

[Devil2575]

The The

LoonR1 said:

Look at the policy booklet and that will explain it.

I think you've got the wrong end of the stick though OP. I think the premium is reviewed every 3 months and will go up, down or stay the same based on how your driving sits within the risk ratings.

The police won't be told if you're speeding, Bell won't share the data with anyone else either.

We've just done more or less the same thread. I wonder if we'll get the same wibble on this one?

Yes we will

Edited by Devil2575 on Sunday 1st February 07:55

[TwigtheWonderkid]

supermono said:

Are we at the dawning of the new era where insurance companies charging extra for speeding tickets get busted for profiteering. I mean nobody who's thought this through believes that habitual speeders would crash more,.

You haven't thought it thru. Most people speed at some point, but the more you speed the more likely you are to get a speeding ticket. The odd speeding fine may or may not prove anything, and many insurance companies charge no extra for one offence, and some do. Each insurer will go off their own stats. But someone with 6 or more points for speeding certainly is a higher accident risk. That's why insurers charge more.

As insurance firms are in cut throat competition with each other for market share, if that weren't true, at least one would break ranks and offer people with multiple speeding offences insurance at no extra cost, and clean up on that profitable business. But they don't, because the have the stats to show extra insurance costs are justified.

[blueg33]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

supermono said:

Are we at the dawning of the new era where insurance companies charging extra for speeding tickets get busted for profiteering. I mean nobody who's thought this through believes that habitual speeders would crash more,.

You haven't thought it thru. Most people speed at some point, but the more you speed the more likely you are to get a speeding ticket. The odd speeding fine may or may not prove anything, and many insurance companies charge no extra for one offence, and some do. Each insurer will go off their own stats. But someone with 6 or more points for speeding certainly is a higher accident risk. That's why insurers charge more.

As insurance firms are in cut throat competition with each other for market share, if that weren't true, at least one would break ranks and offer people with multiple speeding offences insurance at no extra cost, and clean up on that profitable business. But they don't, because the have the stats to show extra insurance costs are justified.

When I went from 3 to 9 poinys via two speeding tickets in the same week, the cost of my premium went up by £5 on a £500 policy. Clearly that insurer didnt really see speeding as an increased risk.

[LoonR1]

rs1952 said:

When I had just turned 16 in June 1968, I went off in my best clothes to the local insurance broker to get insurance for my 1955 Francis Barnett 250cc 2-stroke bike.

TPF&T annual premium cost me £4..10..0d (that's £4.50 to our younger brethren ) A couple of years later when the thieving barstewards put the premium up to £9.00 I took my business elsewhere.

Things have move on a little since then, I presume...

Houses cost about £150 in 1968

Cars were £50

The average wage was about £20 a year

I know I've made those numbers up, but £4.50 was probably a lot of money then.

[blueg33]

in the 1980's with the advent of the hot hatch that really seemed to set insurance premiums rocketing, then computers bring better and more complex risk modelling.

I recall a lad at school in 1987, bought a Sirocco, his insurance cost him £650pa and that seemed like a huge amount