Black box - driver rating

[mybrainhurts]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

mybrainhurts said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

mybrainhurts said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

mybrainhurts said:

If it marks you down, it would shoot me down...

Much driving through the night, including round trips of up to 500 miles, starting at 02.30.

I sleep for 7 to 8 hours before that, traffic is light in the early hours and light traffic makes it safer.

So why do these morons deem this to be punishable by premium?

Oh ffs!! Are you the target audience? Are you 17-20? Young drivers are high risk. Young drivers driving at night are a higher risk. Fact backed up by stats. The multi million pound injury serious claims are nearly always youngsters coming back at 3am from a night out with their mates in the car.

The black box is not compulsory. If you're a "normal" risk driver you probably don't pay that much for insurance anyway, so why have a black box? If you're a young driver whose lifestyle doesn't suit a black box, don't have one. Just pay the higher premium. If you're a young driver that would financially benefit, then get one.

Jesus, it's not rocket surgery! It's giving people a choice. Why the hostility?

Yes, thank you, Mr Hysterical, I know that.

I guess I'm guilty of failing to mention the Bleedin' Obvious, that insurers have started with youngsters by conning them about the benefits, but the obvious long term aim is get this crap made compulsory for all drivers.

Better now?

The first black box policy appeared in 1995. Everyone said back then it's the thin end of the wedge and we'd all have one by Tuesday week. So 22 years on, how is the insurance industry getting on with this cunning plan? Not great from what I can see, as it's still a niche product for young drivers.

But hey ho, please explain to me, Mrs Miggins aged 55 in Suffolk paying £150 comp for her 1.4 eurobox, how does the insurer benefit from her having a black box, fitting it and monitoring it, when she hasn't claims since 1985 when she knocked someone's wing mirror off in the supermarket car park?

Slow progress through resistance, I would suggest. Don't give my opinion a kicking, my information came from a radio interview with somebody in the insurance industry some time ago who declared compulsory universal use was the target.

Somebody here some years ago was complaining that his son drove sensibly, but was penalised for some dubious reasons.

They only have to build in parameters that will catch a lot of people out to make a lot of money in surprise premium "adjustments".

Cynical? Moi?...YES

I'm giving your opinion a kicking because it's tin foil hat nonsense. The radio interview must've been April 1st. If not, answer my Mrs Miggins question.

Most black box policies do not adjust the premium, but offer discounts off next renewal. My mates daughter got quotes of £2750 no black box, or £1400 with a box. No premium adjustments, no curfew. The threat of cancellation (with full pro rate refund) if driving standards were judged as poor. That's a £1350 up front saving. How is this a con? I wish someone would con me by handing me a £1350 saving.

Really, there's some utter tripe posted on PH, but none more so than on black boxc threads.

If that's the universal approach, things have changed and I am wrong. But Am I wrong? I've seen lots of complaints from lots of sources about what appears to be abuse by the insurance companies. Not heard much for a while, though, so you might be right.

I remain to be convinced. Do you have evidence that will convince me? Are you in the insurance industry?

As an aside, they're using black boxes as another way to scare off people they don't want to insure. I have an 06 Suzuki Grand Vitara, insured for me and two sons (in their thirties), three years no claims bonus on that policy, paid around £600 recently.

Here's the tail end offer from one of the comparison websites...

Compulsory black box...

[TwigtheWonderkid]

mybrainhurts said:

I remain to be convinced. Do you have evidence that will convince me? Are you in the insurance industry?

No I'm not.

Evidence...22 years of daft scaremongering and yet black box policies remain a niche product for young drivers. That's a fact.

mybrainhurts said:

As an aside, they're using black boxes as another way to scare off people they don't want to insure. I have an 06 Suzuki Grand Vitara, insured for me and two sons (in their thirties), three years no claims bonus on that policy, paid around £600 recently.

Here's the tail end offer from one of the comparison websites...

Compulsory black box...

It's a black box policy designed for young drivers. You aren't a young driver, so they don't want your business. That's it.

Fed Ex charge £49 to deliver a letter from London to Inverness. The Royal Mail do it for about 60p. Fed Ex don't want to deliver single letters from London to Inverness, so they price accordingly. No conspiracy, no hidden agenda. It's not the business they want.

On one hand you say it's a secret plot to get everyone to have a black box. Now you're complaining that insurers are actively discouraging you from taking a black box policy.

Edited by TwigtheWonderkid on Thursday 16th March 15:11

[mybrainhurts]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

mybrainhurts said:

I remain to be convinced. Do you have evidence that will convince me? Are you in the insurance industry?

No I'm not.

Evidence...22 years of daft scaremongering and yet black box policies remain a niche product for young drivers. That's a fact.

mybrainhurts said:

As an aside, they're using black boxes as another way to scare off people they don't want to insure. I have an 06 Suzuki Grand Vitara, insured for me and two sons (in their thirties), three years no claims bonus on that policy, paid around £600 recently.

Here's the tail end offer from one of the comparison websites...

Compulsory black box...

It's a black box policy designed for young drivers. You aren't a young driver, so they don't want your business. That's it.

Fed Ex charge £49 to deliver a letter from London to Inverness. The Royal Mail do it for about 60p. Fed Ex don't want to deliver single letters from London to Inverness, so they price accordingly. No conspiracy, no hidden agenda. It's not the business they want.

On one hand you say it's a secret plot to get everyone to have a black box. Now you're complaining that insurers are actively discouraging you from taking a black box policy.

Yes,I found it amusing too. That's why I posted it. HTH.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

mybrainhurts said:

Yes,I found it amusing too. That's why I posted it. HTH.

You didn't think it was contrary to your conspiracy theory?

[mybrainhurts]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

mybrainhurts said:

Yes,I found it amusing too. That's why I posted it. HTH.

You didn't think it was contrary to your conspiracy theory?

Not inconsistent, no, a separate issue.

Conspiracy THEORY? When someone in the industry states it as fact on something like The Money Programme, it's not a theory any more.

Didn't you not notice an earlier post, naming one company that requires boxes now?

Failure to take off for a lengthy period does not mean the beast is dead.

I'm finding it hard to understand why you're getting worked up about it.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

mybrainhurts said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

mybrainhurts said:

Yes,I found it amusing too. That's why I posted it. HTH.

You didn't think it was contrary to your conspiracy theory?

Not inconsistent, no, a separate issue.

Conspiracy THEORY? When someone in the industry states it as fact on something like The Money Programme, it's not a theory any more.

Didn't you not notice an earlier post, naming one company that requires boxes now?

Failure to take off for a lengthy period does not mean the beast is dead.

I'm finding it hard to understand why you're getting worked up about it.

It's just depressing that people buy into this drivel. Mrs Miggins, aged 55 in Suffolk paying sweet f.a for very little risk. Will someone please explain the economics of forcing her down the black box route?

[mybrainhurts]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

mybrainhurts said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

mybrainhurts said:

Yes,I found it amusing too. That's why I posted it. HTH.

You didn't think it was contrary to your conspiracy theory?

Not inconsistent, no, a separate issue.

Conspiracy THEORY? When someone in the industry states it as fact on something like The Money Programme, it's not a theory any more.

Didn't you not notice an earlier post, naming one company that requires boxes now?

Failure to take off for a lengthy period does not mean the beast is dead.

I'm finding it hard to understand why you're getting worked up about it.

It's just depressing that people buy into this drivel. Mrs Miggins, aged 55 in Suffolk paying sweet f.a for very little risk. Will someone please explain the economics of forcing her down the black box route?

Must be some profit in the £140 installation charge.

But why do you assume the plan is to extract more cash from all drivers?

And people "buy into this drivel" when they hear an industry spokesman say this is the ultimate goal.

[oldbanger]

eCall compatible telematics boxes will be mandatory in all new vehicles by the end of the year, factory fitted.

eCall is a tracking system which will alert the police if you have an accident, with your exact location. Well it'll alert eCall who will contact the police, as I doubt police forces will have the technology to receive the data direct. It's not a full telematics system - it only kicks in if there's an accident.

Whether it gets implemented is really going to be down to logistics really, not through lack of interest from the government.

It will undoubtedly benefit insurers to avoid paying out for fake accidents and know that they know about every real one, but to be honest I don't think the insurance industry are the driving force here.

Edited by oldbanger on Thursday 16th March 23:37

[Fastpedeller]

We have one fitted (18 yr old daughter as a named driver), and we (all) get over 80%. A few weeks ago I registered less for cornering, and we realised the journey involved going round and round the multi-storey carpark

[oldbanger]

Mine is effectively operating with a curfew. Journeys around the local villages in the evening are graded down to 50%, even if I get 5/5 for smoothness and speed. One local village is scoring lower than Birmingham ring road for high risk roads. I actually get better scores driving through genuine accident hotspots in rush hour. Even if it's registering brake and acceleration alerts

I had to call the telematics people today as I got a message asking me why I haven't activated the device yet. So I asked them about the scoring system. They said it was nothing to do with them and transferred me to the insurers, who told me they have no say and the only thing that goes to them is the final score at renewal time.

I did some research into scoring systems for use as indicators, in a previous career, so this kind of stuff fascinates me

Edited by oldbanger on Thursday 16th March 23:43

[eldar]

mybrainhurts said:

Not inconsistent, no, a separate issue.

Conspiracy THEORY? When someone in the industry states it as fact on something like The Money Programme, it's not a theory any more.

Didn't you not notice an earlier post, naming one company that requires boxes now?

Failure to take off for a lengthy period does not mean the beast is dead.

I'm finding it hard to understand why you're getting worked up about it.

I suggest you listen to this.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08h08km

Explains why black boxes are not going to be cost effective for the majority of car insurance policies. Cost/benefit principally, data protection legislation and competition additionally.

[AREA]

TIGA84 said:

AREA said:

Personally

I look at her journey details online every day. If she's scored below 100% we talk about it to understand what was going on so she can learn and improve. She welcomes that.

That makes me a little bit sad reading that.

I'm all for the idea, but it also squeezes ALL the fun out of what is in my eyes one of the most enjoyable things you can do.

Surely the Scandinavian way of learning/training assessing answers virtually every problem we have here in the UK?

Interesting view... she enjoys driving and really enjoys learning and improving. She is not a timid, don't touch the brake or the black box will complain or I can't make progress because the black box will score me down. She is developing a nice, fluid, anticipatory style.

Driving is part technical, part art, part social and psychological understanding, part magic (as in enjoyable magic, not "blimey, how did that happen?"). It seems that she understands those ingredients and wants to keep learning.
So don't feel sad! Feel good that some youngsters are petrol heads who get pleasure out of the freedom of driving and improving,

Personally I am very pleased that she wants to learn beyond the driving test. And I am very pleased when her friends tell me that she's the best driver they've been in a car with (however, who on earth is normally driving them... be careful out there!)

[TwigtheWonderkid]

mybrainhurts said:

And people "buy into this drivel" when they hear an industry spokesman say this is the ultimate goal.

I honestly think you must've misheard that, or got the wrong end of the stick. Or perhaps missed the bit where he/she said "for young drivers. I have a lot of dealings with the industry and no one is remotely interested in fitting black boxes to the literally millions of people paying sub £250/£200 for comp insurance. That's because there's no logic or profit in doing so.

And that's proven by the fact that in 20+ years of black box policies, no one has ever even considered going down that road.

[xjay1337]

The issue with black boxes is that they are not always the cheapest option.

I'm 25 and looking to insure a 140bhp Fiesta as a second car. My main car is my Scirocco. Due to no claims only being applied to 1 vehicle I have to insure the Fez with 0 years no claims.
I can get it for £580 as a normal policy or blackbox insurance is around £750.

Of course I get the target market is the young 17-19 year old driver. Great.
Conversely, penalising for driving at 7:30pm (for example) does no-one any good as that is a pretty reasonable time for someone to be going shopping after work or something.
But driving at 2am is not typical so you can perhaps expect some penalty.
It does not fixing though, the story above about driving along a road one way without any penalty but then getting a penalty the other.... WTF.

I do worry that they will start to bring out black boxes for other drivers, perhaps those with performance cars and then the elderly, and then to your average 25-60 year old driver.....

All part of the tin-foil hat scheme of tracking every vehicle.

The wider issue with insurance is the great injustices for example - Your no claims bonus can only apply to one vehicle however if you have 2 no claims bonuses and crash then it effects both your policies.
But that rant is for another day :-)

[TwigtheWonderkid]

xjay1337 said:

The wider issue with insurance is the great injustices for example - Your no claims bonus can only apply to one vehicle however if you have 2 no claims bonuses and crash then it effects both your policies.
But that rant is for another day :-)

It would only effect the no claims bonus on the policy you claimed on.

[xjay1337]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

It would only effect the no claims bonus on the policy you claimed on.

But you still have to declare your accident on any policies.

Another is not allowing motorcycle no claims to count as car no claims, but a motorcycle accident will impact your car claims.

[Geoffrey Boycott]

I have an admiral black box. It is sold on the premise that the feedback it gives will make you a better driver but this is not the case in my opinion.

In my first year of driving the portal did not work so I did not get a score.

In my second year with a new car I've almost always been scored as bronze until the start of this year when I decided to change that. Now I receive silver over 50% of the time by sticking to speed limits and accelerating extremely slowly (slower than most buses).

But for days when I am scored bronze there is no obvious reason why which is why the system is pointless. There is a feedback section on the home page of the portal which gives a vague message such as "your acceleration has been sharp at times recently" but does not say on what day or which journeys this occured. How am I supposed to improve based on that when I am driving extremely smoothly and slowly already? How am I supposed to know what it counts as unsafe acceleration?

Another problem with the system is it only gives a score for each day rather than each journey which makes it even harder to pin-point there problem.

It also seems to mark you down to bronze for any long (mostly motorway-based) journeys and high average speed journeys no matter whether you stick to the speed limit or not.

On days when I get a gold rating I have no idea what I did correctly and therefore cannot replicate it.

Lastly, it uploads the telematics data with over a weeks delay so that you can't even remember what you did or where you drove on that particular day so any scores are meaningless.

Unfortunately depsite multiple attempts to learn how these things work there is somehow absolutely no information available on the internet detailing how these things work.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Geoffrey Boycott said:

Unfortunately depsite multiple attempts to learn how these things work there is somehow absolutely no information available on the internet detailing how these things work.

If you read back thru your post, you can see how they work. Assume you are a young driver, you stick to speed limits, you haven't crashed, so it works.

Young drivers are a high risk group. Those that agree to a black box are, by the fact that they are agreeing to it, the best of a bad bunch. The ones who think they are the next Ayrton Senna won't opt for a black box. So the black box insurer has weeded out those tts immediately. So half the job is done before the insurance company even start.

What the box measures or how it works is largely irrelevant. It could be a dummy box and it would do the trick, so long as the driver doesn't know.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

xjay1337 said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

It would only effect the no claims bonus on the policy you claimed on.

But you still have to declare your accident on any policies.

Another is not allowing motorcycle no claims to count as car no claims, but a motorcycle accident will impact your car claims.

I'm not seeing the problem. Of course any claim you have is a material fact for all your insurers assessing your risk going forward. So any claim needs to be disclosed to your other insurers. But only the bonus on the policy you claim on if reduced.

If you owned 2 houses and burnt one down by falling asleep in bed whilst smoking, do you not think the insurer of the other house is entitled to know that, and load their premium accordingly??

[Geoffrey Boycott]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

If you read back thru your post, you can see how they work. Assume you are a young driver, you stick to speed limits, you haven't crashed, so it works.

I can accelerate slowly and go around corners slowly and still get seemingly random results. They don't give any detailed guidance on what the box will consider unsafe driving on motorways for example - I would consider sticking to the speed limits, leaving a reasonable gap infront and not making sudden lane changes safe driving but this results in bronze 75% and silver the rest. It doesn't make sense. I'd love to hear from somebody who has a gold rating to see what they do beyond driving slowly.