RE: Citroen fits insurance black boxes
Discussion
Twincam16 said:
They've already been shown to have problems: http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-news/consumer-new...
Also, I remember a You & Yours programme back in March last year where a number of proven safe motorists with very long NCBs tried them out and found their premiums going up month-on-month after the insurance company arbitrarily fiddled with the parameters of what it considered 'dangerous'.
Brake hard to avoid a hazard? Dangerous.
Accelerate hard to overtake a lorry on the motorway? Dangerous.
Corner in such a way that causes the bodyshell to remain anything but absolutely perpendicular throughout? Dangerous.
Infringe a speed limit by so much as 0.5mph? Dangerous.
Stretch a gear beyond 2000rpm? Dangerous.
After a while they realised they were looking at an insurance bill twice or in some cases three times the size of their existing non-telematic arrangement, and happily handed the things back. Forget driving in a way that even approaches enjoyable - these things fined you unless you drove like a completely inflexible robot incapable of adapting to the road conditions.
Yet more crap from people who seem to think that more computers are the solution to absolutely everything.
My son had a 'black box' policy when he was 17. All it monitored was that he didn't drive between 11pm and 5am.Also, I remember a You & Yours programme back in March last year where a number of proven safe motorists with very long NCBs tried them out and found their premiums going up month-on-month after the insurance company arbitrarily fiddled with the parameters of what it considered 'dangerous'.
Brake hard to avoid a hazard? Dangerous.
Accelerate hard to overtake a lorry on the motorway? Dangerous.
Corner in such a way that causes the bodyshell to remain anything but absolutely perpendicular throughout? Dangerous.
Infringe a speed limit by so much as 0.5mph? Dangerous.
Stretch a gear beyond 2000rpm? Dangerous.
After a while they realised they were looking at an insurance bill twice or in some cases three times the size of their existing non-telematic arrangement, and happily handed the things back. Forget driving in a way that even approaches enjoyable - these things fined you unless you drove like a completely inflexible robot incapable of adapting to the road conditions.
Yet more crap from people who seem to think that more computers are the solution to absolutely everything.
CoolHands said:
Do we trust governments not to spy on it's citizens? Obviously, if you've nothing to hide... etc
It's not the big brother aspect that bothers me, it's the inappropriate use of the information.Eg, if you brake suddenly because someone walks out in front of you, you get a bad score because of erratic driving. What will happen is people will learn to play the system and that might put people's lives at risk.
Also any tech relying on GPS is useless in many built up areas. I have a 15 min walk home from work, and with a GPS tracker, I walk on water, zoom at 50mph for a few seconds, walk through walls etc.
The insurers will use this data to grade you regardless of how accurate or pertinent it is.
Urgh, the prospect of black boxes fills me with dread.
It's unrelated, but similar, how the road network is changing- basically every element of "thought" on the part of drivers is being squeezed out in favour of traffic lights and defined lanes on RABs etc. Which is turning Britain's drivers into bovine automatons.
It's unrelated, but similar, how the road network is changing- basically every element of "thought" on the part of drivers is being squeezed out in favour of traffic lights and defined lanes on RABs etc. Which is turning Britain's drivers into bovine automatons.
Now hold on, how many times have we been told that spiraling insurance costs are due to the exponential rise in the cost of claims?
"No win, no fee" claims "services", rental "courtesy cars" at rates far above the market average - all manner of corrupt behaviour gets reported on as the cause for ever higher premiums.
Now we're told that what we need to do is make sure that young people all drive within a set of parameters that are more about limiting liability than about safety in order to be allowed to drive (which is the nett result)
This treats a symptom of a broken system - it does nothing to treat the cause other than divert attention from it.
"No win, no fee" claims "services", rental "courtesy cars" at rates far above the market average - all manner of corrupt behaviour gets reported on as the cause for ever higher premiums.
Now we're told that what we need to do is make sure that young people all drive within a set of parameters that are more about limiting liability than about safety in order to be allowed to drive (which is the nett result)
This treats a symptom of a broken system - it does nothing to treat the cause other than divert attention from it.
dandare said:
They should put them in BMW X6s. They could catch all the drug dealers.
Ironically, I suspect an awful lot of high end vehicles already have some form of tracking devices as standard. The difference is that insurance companies want them there in case of theft, but it's not difficult to economies of scale delivering a generic tracking box that does everything and just has certain features locked off if not required. Until the insurance company changes their mind and says "actually, we want to make sure you're not doing anything too dangerous". I think this will be the more subversive way that the boxes become more common.Fire99 said:
loudlashadjuster said:
Also there is a real risk that buyers of cars equipped with 'black boxes' will be concentrating on not breaking 'rules' than safe driving. Look at how some people react to average speed cameras. It's far too simplistic to say "If you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to worry about".. !!
The criteria by which the box determines whether one is 'safe' is very crude and doesn't take into account weather conditions, surrounding traffic, road surface etc.
People need to establish their 'in built assessment/understanding' of what is safe or not. Drive to the conditions, not because you think you are going to be told off/punished. One needs to be able to push limits a little, it's the only way to learn.
I am certain one could register a very safe rating on the box and yet be staggeringly dangerous on the road.
Again, it's an easy solution (and nice money making scheme) whereas proper driver training and education gets thrown to the wayside.
g3org3y said:
The criteria by which the box determines whether one is 'safe' is very crude and doesn't take into account weather conditions, surrounding traffic, road surface etc.
A minor point, but surely the box doesn't actually determine anything? I'd imagine it just sends raw sensor information to the insurers who then process it on their servers? Or does it actually have the intelligence built into the device itself? IDrinkPetrol said:
Now hold on, how many times have we been told that spiraling insurance costs are due to the exponential rise in the cost of claims?
"No win, no fee" claims "services", rental "courtesy cars" at rates far above the market average - all manner of corrupt behaviour gets reported on as the cause for ever higher premiums.
Now we're told that what we need to do is make sure that young people all drive within a set of parameters that are more about limiting liability than about safety in order to be allowed to drive (which is the nett result)
This treats a symptom of a broken system - it does nothing to treat the cause other than divert attention from it.
id rather intergrated camera system, that only saves the last 5mins in the event of an accident. this would prevent the scam crash's"No win, no fee" claims "services", rental "courtesy cars" at rates far above the market average - all manner of corrupt behaviour gets reported on as the cause for ever higher premiums.
Now we're told that what we need to do is make sure that young people all drive within a set of parameters that are more about limiting liability than about safety in order to be allowed to drive (which is the nett result)
This treats a symptom of a broken system - it does nothing to treat the cause other than divert attention from it.
V8mate said:
Twincam16 said:
They've already been shown to have problems: http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-news/consumer-new...
Also, I remember a You & Yours programme back in March last year where a number of proven safe motorists with very long NCBs tried them out and found their premiums going up month-on-month after the insurance company arbitrarily fiddled with the parameters of what it considered 'dangerous'.
Brake hard to avoid a hazard? Dangerous.
Accelerate hard to overtake a lorry on the motorway? Dangerous.
Corner in such a way that causes the bodyshell to remain anything but absolutely perpendicular throughout? Dangerous.
Infringe a speed limit by so much as 0.5mph? Dangerous.
Stretch a gear beyond 2000rpm? Dangerous.
After a while they realised they were looking at an insurance bill twice or in some cases three times the size of their existing non-telematic arrangement, and happily handed the things back. Forget driving in a way that even approaches enjoyable - these things fined you unless you drove like a completely inflexible robot incapable of adapting to the road conditions.
Yet more crap from people who seem to think that more computers are the solution to absolutely everything.
My son had a 'black box' policy when he was 17. All it monitored was that he didn't drive between 11pm and 5am.Also, I remember a You & Yours programme back in March last year where a number of proven safe motorists with very long NCBs tried them out and found their premiums going up month-on-month after the insurance company arbitrarily fiddled with the parameters of what it considered 'dangerous'.
Brake hard to avoid a hazard? Dangerous.
Accelerate hard to overtake a lorry on the motorway? Dangerous.
Corner in such a way that causes the bodyshell to remain anything but absolutely perpendicular throughout? Dangerous.
Infringe a speed limit by so much as 0.5mph? Dangerous.
Stretch a gear beyond 2000rpm? Dangerous.
After a while they realised they were looking at an insurance bill twice or in some cases three times the size of their existing non-telematic arrangement, and happily handed the things back. Forget driving in a way that even approaches enjoyable - these things fined you unless you drove like a completely inflexible robot incapable of adapting to the road conditions.
Yet more crap from people who seem to think that more computers are the solution to absolutely everything.
As far as I'm aware this only monitors aggressive driving. So harsh acceleration, deceleration, and manoeuvres.
It doesn't really pick out the bad drivers. Such as those who don't indicate, check their mirrors, who have poor lane discipline, and those who jump red lights. What about those who drive too close? Or even those who use the phone whilst driving?
All it appears to do is monitor speed and smooth driving. It goes some of the way, but you can do those well, whilst still being an awful driver.
It doesn't really pick out the bad drivers. Such as those who don't indicate, check their mirrors, who have poor lane discipline, and those who jump red lights. What about those who drive too close? Or even those who use the phone whilst driving?
All it appears to do is monitor speed and smooth driving. It goes some of the way, but you can do those well, whilst still being an awful driver.
I can't think of anything worse to have fitted to my car....except a KIA badge. The fact that it's standard equipment is awful. An option.....sure if you're that way inclined. Anyone who is into car's won't be buying it.....then again anyone who is into cars wouldn't be buying a peugeot. Ha!!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff