RE: Citroen fits insurance black boxes
Discussion
MKnight702 said:
How would the insurers lose money if they set the limits so that anything other than "driving miss daisy" style triggered an increase in premium?
If it doesn't work, it won't enable them to tailor prices to risk. If they can't do that, there is nothing in it for them. If they undercharge bad risks and overcharge good risks, they will lose money on the bad and lose business on the good. If the device doesn't work, the policies without the device won't be more expensive than the ones with it.TwigtheWonderkid said:
The fewer accidents there are, the more profit they can make.
They want less carnage on the roads, and so do we. Motorists and insurance companies don't have to be at war.
Until you throw the 'Injury vultures for you' spanner in the works. They want less carnage on the roads, and so do we. Motorists and insurance companies don't have to be at war.
My BMW was reversed into in a petrol station last May. Since then, I've been bombarded with phone calls and text messages from these kinds of companies, and the only place they could have got my number from is the insurance company. I now also know why they were so keen to give me a brand new Jaguar XF Premium Luxury as a courtesy car for a month...
TwigtheWonderkid said:
And here's an interesting fact. The people who work for and run insurance companies....rumour has it that some of the actually drive as well!!
So do those that work for the oil companies. - It doesn't stop them from profiteering too.trashbat said:
Why then does everyone not pay the highest common denominator as a premium, i.e. £4k/year, as if they were 17? Indeed, why do telematics products already exist?
If there is a competitive market for the product (and the risks do come out as low, which I'm not 100% sure of) then it's entirely possible that intelligent monitoring devices have a future.
Put simply, there will not be enough of us demanding that the system be made fair to force them to do so. This is the case with many motoring laws, regulations etc. and why despite me having never caused an accident, I would be penalised for driving exactly as I do now (full throttle and exuberant driving where appropriate and without endangering others).If there is a competitive market for the product (and the risks do come out as low, which I'm not 100% sure of) then it's entirely possible that intelligent monitoring devices have a future.
otolith said:
It is in the insurer's interests that the device is fair.
I admire your optimism if you don't foresee these devices impinging on our driving pleasure. Whether that means that we can't use full throttle without getting "marked down", or (once they're developed further) whether we're automatically wrist-slapped every time we exceed what are increasingly draconian speed limits on our country roads (without endangering anyone despite what the anti-fun brigade would have you believe). Imagine trying to convince this lot that the latter isn't a good idea.
Clivey said:
I admire your optimism if you don't foresee these devices impinging on our driving pleasure. Whether that means that we can't use full throttle without getting "marked down", or (once they're developed further) whether we're automatically wrist-slapped every time we exceed what are increasingly draconian speed limits on our country roads (without endangering anyone despite what the anti-fun brigade would have you believe). Imagine trying to convince this lot that the latter isn't a good idea.
They won't impinge on my driving pleasure because they are optional and because I am not in a demographic which habitually drives so badly that the only way to get reasonably priced insurance is to have a permanent electronic back seat driver installed. If they were being mandated by government for government purposes that would be an entirely different matter.asdfgh1 said:
What happened? 10 years ago a 17yr old could jump into a saxo vts with free insurance. Now it's near impossible for them to drive at all.
Not sure that's quite right - 12 years ago, I jumped into a 1.1 carb Fiesta with all of 44bhp and paid nearly £1700 3rd party F&T. Expensive insurance for kids isn't exactly new... It's just even more expensive these days!otolith said:
Terminator X said:
Have you heard of data sharing?
TX.
With whom and to what end?TX.
To what end? CCTV brought in to protect us from terrorists etc now used to send us £60 fines through the post, ANPR brought in to root out all those nasty road tax dodgers now used to send us £60 parking fines through the post ... can you really see no danger at all to the motorist once black boxes become the norm?
TX.
otolith said:
They won't impinge on my driving pleasure because they are optional and because I am not in a demographic which habitually drives so badly that the only way to get reasonably priced insurance is to have a permanent electronic back seat driver installed. If they were being mandated by government for government purposes that would be an entirely different matter.
It's only a matter of time. - As soon as the Govt. realises how much they can make and is able to find a way to justify tapping into them, we'll be lucky if we don't have them fitted to our persons. Then again, the way some people cuddle their mobiles......as someone else already said: The only thing Orwell got wrong was the date.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff