CURFEW BY BACK DOOR?

Author
Discussion

WildCat

Original Poster:

8,369 posts

244 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
"More Than" Insurance are offering young und new drivers lower insurance premium providing they agree not to drive at night or after dark



Short of tagging - how would you enforce? Who would agree? Rahter limits working hours in winter time too

These people would appear to be proverbially dead from the neck up...

Surely - focus on improving standards und going the German route und requiring proof of night/twilight drive in learning process.

ISt 40% discount for 18-25 years. und £25 per time if they break rules. Hear just now - they plan to put monitoring equipment in these cars.

So... what if your Mama drives this car?

I do not think we will be using this firm fro the kittens then

thepassenger

6,962 posts

236 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
I bet if you investigate it's a response to the "Please stop the noisey chav mobiles racing up my street" brigade or these people are so retarted they think it'll stop kids joy riding for some idiotic reason.

Strange thing is Sadako's MR2 is louder than most of the chaviots that go buzzing up and down the road... something about having a real engine in the back and not an elastic band

jasandjules

69,931 posts

230 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
I guess they enforce it simply by the fact in the event of a claim they get the time of the crash, cross ref that against sunrise/sunset on that day, and if dark, hey presto, instant no pay out clause.......

over_the_hill

3,189 posts

247 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
The time span is 23:00 - 06:00 when there is a much greater chance of a young driver being involved in an RTA according to the figures quoted. Initially this sounds like a good idea as it should help to get insurance costs down for younger drivers if they avoid driving at high risk times e.g. go into town at night with friends then its either taxi, bus, home before 23:00 or £25 surcharge. However, how long before this starts to spread across all ages. The argument will be something like this - you drive to and from work at peak times, more traffic on road, more risk of RTA, higher premium. Even though we already pay for this by the Domestic and Commuting clause in most insurance contracts.

eccles

13,740 posts

223 months

tigger1

8,402 posts

222 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
In many ways I think this could be a v good idea. I'm no longer under 25, but when I was I would have considereed this, although many times I would want to be out later than 11pm.

Worrying thing is, as pointed out, the likelihood for this to "creep"...the thin end of the wedge? Perhaps 25-35 year olds will be next to be offered the discount - and then people who don't take up the opportunity will find themselves being classed as more high risk, then eventually anyone who drives at night has a "higher than average" risk...

No way they can demand to install anything in the car though, just wouldn't work - but it'll (again) probably increase the number of under-25's who get a tug from the police if out during the night for no reason other than age.

hedders

24,460 posts

248 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
A problem i can see with this..

I am driving down the road at 2:00am and get hit by someone who should not be out this late. They tell me they are not insured unless i say the accident happened three hours earlier.

Do I lie about the accident and risk getting in trouble or do i pay for my own damage?

And why should I have to be put in that position?

mondeohdear

2,046 posts

216 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
What happens if there is an emergency situation and a young person with this policy needs to drive 2300-0600hrs? Stupid idea in my opinion.

over_the_hill

3,189 posts

247 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
hedders said:
A problem i can see with this..
I am driving down the road at 2:00am and get hit by someone who should not be out this late. They tell me they are not insured unless i say the accident happened three hours earlier.
Do I lie about the accident and risk getting in trouble or do i pay for my own damage?


Haven't seen full details but would assume third party cover will always apply. If they don't pay the £25 to cover themselves each time then cover will probably be cancelled and they are back to expensive rates. The tracker in their car will confirm the time anyway.

tigger1 said:
No way they can demand to install anything in the car though


Though probable that government will have passed legislation to fit all new cars with trackers within say next 10 years. Then insurance companies can use this data via the "reason to know route" as with parking ticket agencies and the dvla as present.

eccles

13,740 posts

223 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
you can just see a business opportunity coming up in the future along the lines of unlocking mobile phones, 'want your black box memory altered?....that'll be £20 please.'

mybrainhurts

90,809 posts

256 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
It's started, then...knew it would.

Norwich Union began this repulsive control freakery a while ago.

I'd risk a goodly bet their ultimate aim is to compulsorily monitor our every move and penalise us every time we break the speed limit.

Remember that cop who estimated the speed limit is broken something like 30 billion times a year...?

They've latched on to that and they're salivating over the cash tills already...

We really need to boycott these insurers. I'm not with them, but I hope those here who are will switch their cover and tell the culprits why.

leosayer

7,308 posts

245 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
hedders said:
A problem i can see with this..

I am driving down the road at 2:00am and get hit by someone who should not be out this late. They tell me they are not insured unless i say the accident happened three hours earlier

They are still insured, but they will owe the ins co £25 for driving at that time.

Edited by leosayer on Friday 4th August 15:19

toni896

2,188 posts

227 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
[quote="BBC News" installed, the device sends a message to the company whenever the car starts, giving the time and place that the journey started.

A further message is sent when the engine is switched off to confirm the journey has ended. [/quote]

I wonder if they will do Time/distance to work out the speed ? and send warning /cancellation letter to those who break the speed limit, or refuse a claim.

Edited by toni896 on Friday 4th August 13:20

gridgway

1,001 posts

246 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
I can't really see the problem as it's a commercial thing. The 18yr olds will not go for it and it will die a rapid commercial death!

Graham

thepassenger

6,962 posts

236 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
eccles said:
you can just see a business opportunity coming up in the future along the lines of unlocking mobile phones, 'want your black box memory altered?....that'll be £20 please.'

Depending on how insidious these devices are it'll either by 'bypassed for £20 sir?' or 'Compatible ECU unit - No tracker £200'.

To be honest even if it was the law to have one fitted it'll meet mr. hammer either way. I'm a private citizen and don't appriciate my elected government spying on me... I appriciate private companies doing it even less.

tigger1

8,402 posts

222 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
mondeohdear said:
What happens if there is an emergency situation and a young person with this policy needs to drive 2300-0600hrs? Stupid idea in my opinion.


Same as would happen now if somebody who wasn't insured was in a situation where there's a car available that they'd like (?need) to drive...you can chance it, you'll probably be fine, but if you get pulled you're daffy ducked. I've often argued about this -"would you drive a car without insurance if somebodies life depended on it?" I've always said yes, but I would 'fess up to it straight away, and not take the pee. It would probably end up in court and then I'd *pray* for a bit of common sense. One example I can think of is out in the middle of knowhere in a car. I might not know a road name, but my mate or relative who was driving has taken ill...do I try to guide an ambulance, drive to hospital or drive to somewhere i can give directions to? I'd do the last one - drive to a major junction or something, whilst ringing for help explaining. I'd only do this if I had a relevant license though.

(God, as an aside that was quite lengthy..apologies!)

gridgway

1,001 posts

246 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
is it me or is this deliberately being misunderstood?

It's a commercial proposition. Pay less, dont drive at night and have a box to keep you honest and monitor when you use it at night so we can collect our extra 25 poundsies.

Not legislation to put boxes in cars, not catching people out, not trying to scam anyone, not the start of a sinister precedent!

Wot are you lot on? :-))

Graham

hanse cronje

2,198 posts

222 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
surely its only the same idea as restrictive mileage policies

you claim only to drive 5000 pa, you get a good premium

you actually drive 15000, crash, motor engineer assess damage notes mileage higher than they could reasonably anticipate,
refuse to pay or ask for more cash due to perceived heightened risk

thepassenger

6,962 posts

236 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
gridgway said:


Wot are you lot on? :-))


Dunno. But I'll have another, you want?

deeps

5,393 posts

242 months

Saturday 5th August 2006
quotequote all
Presumably the insurance company have stats that say most new drivers have accidents between 11pm-6am then?

In my experience new drivers (teens/early 20's) have accidents through inexperience, ie not knowing how to control the car when things go wrong, not being able to apply speed sensibly or control it.

The only thing I can see this policy achieving, is to change the peak accident times from present to 10.45pm, when they're all rushing home for the curfew. You can't put an old head on young shoulders, they'll always do what they do regardless of the time.

Far better would be to encourage skid pan training and a track day with the insurance policy, that would teach them some vital skills IMO. Some new drivers I have seen really have no idea, but that's understandable as realistic car control isn't part of the test and isn't taught. Then they pass and we have a new boyracer who knows it all...