RE: Swinton new points scheme
Thursday 17th May 2007
In another twist to the speed camera debate Swinton have announced that driving licence points will no longer automatically contribute towards insurance premium calculations.
Swinton new points scheme
Growing penalty points sets insurance company re-think
Swinton PR includes: "Pointed drivers are no longer automatically penalised at Swinton as a result of the increase in the number of motorists now saddled with penalty points. And the move reflects a change in attitude by the insurance industry as the estimated number of pointed motorists tops 6 million."
Paul Smith, founder of SafeSpeed.org.uk, said: "Insurance companies are in the business of calculating risk to set their premiums. This announcement is all the proof we need to know that driving licence points no longer indicate risky drivers. The vast majority of licence points are for speeding offences detected by camera. Department for Transport's needless and ineffective obsession with speed cameras has therefore seriously damaged the penalty points system."
"Damage to the penalty points system is just one negative side effect of the speed camera programme. Safe Speed recently published a report listing 40 negative side effects."
"Clearly the Swinton announcement means that we are giving out fines and points to drivers at random. If we gave fines only to risky drivers then the risk would be clear in insurance company's crash statistics.
"The penalty points system has been of very significant importance to road safety."
"It just goes to prove that speed camera fines are pointless."
Discussion
Penalty points should be one of the main methods of differentiating between low and high risk drivers. But as they are handed out inconsistently, both in general, and in terms of high speeding points but few dangerous driving points.
This just shows they will further assume that age = how safe you are on a factor of 0 to dead.
This just shows they will further assume that age = how safe you are on a factor of 0 to dead.
E38 said:
Penalty points should be one of the main methods of differentiating between low and high risk drivers. But as they are handed out inconsistently, both in general, and in terms of high speeding points but few dangerous driving points.
This just shows they will further assume that age = how safe you are on a factor of 0 to dead.
This just shows they will further assume that age = how safe you are on a factor of 0 to dead.
If they were only used for offences where there is a safety issue, ie driving without due care, dangerous driving, drink driving etc, then they would do that quite well. Using them for speeding tickets just shows that a person has exceeded an arbitrary number, and gives no indication of whether the driving was any good or not.
Be interesting to see a) what their future claims history looks like
b)whether other insurers jump on bandwagon BUT mainly how are they going to rate drivers if they are ignoring points across the whole spectrum. I can only see the usual premium hike to penalise the majority to cover the minority.
b)whether other insurers jump on bandwagon BUT mainly how are they going to rate drivers if they are ignoring points across the whole spectrum. I can only see the usual premium hike to penalise the majority to cover the minority.
Bit of a non-event I think, just a publicity stunt.
Swinton are not an insurance company or insurer - they are a broker!
All this means is that they will try to cover your risk through insurers that don't charge a premium for speeding points - however, those insurers may not be the best value for you.
Some insurers have been doing this for a while - I know Liverpool Victoria was doing this 3 years ago when I was insuring the M5 they asked me if I had any points on my license. I said I had two SP30's, and they told me they were only interested in non-SP endorsements.
Swinton are not an insurance company or insurer - they are a broker!
All this means is that they will try to cover your risk through insurers that don't charge a premium for speeding points - however, those insurers may not be the best value for you.
Some insurers have been doing this for a while - I know Liverpool Victoria was doing this 3 years ago when I was insuring the M5 they asked me if I had any points on my license. I said I had two SP30's, and they told me they were only interested in non-SP endorsements.
mmm-five said:
Bit of a non-event I think, just a publicity stunt.
Swinton are not an insurance company or insurer - they are a broker!
All this means is that they will try to cover your risk through insurers that don't charge a premium for speeding points - however, those insurers may not be the best value for you.
Some insurers have been doing this for a while - I know Liverpool Victoria was doing this 3 years ago when I was insuring the M5 they asked me if I had any points on my license. I said I had two SP30's, and they told me they were only interested in non-SP endorsements.
Swinton are not an insurance company or insurer - they are a broker!
All this means is that they will try to cover your risk through insurers that don't charge a premium for speeding points - however, those insurers may not be the best value for you.
Some insurers have been doing this for a while - I know Liverpool Victoria was doing this 3 years ago when I was insuring the M5 they asked me if I had any points on my license. I said I had two SP30's, and they told me they were only interested in non-SP endorsements.
Took the words right out of my mouth. As a motor underwriter, I decide what factors I use to rate a risk, not Swinton. I still think that someones licence history is a rating factor. Generally, I would not be too worried about a driver with a couple of 'isolated' SP30's, but if that history shows the driver is consistantly getting these convictions, or shows other non SP convictions, I would rate accordingly. Someone averaging one sp30 every couple of years is a higher risk than someone with none. If they are not spotting the speed camera's whilst driving, what else are they missing? That child between the parked cars?, that cyclist with dark clothing on?
rgracin said:
mmm-five said:
Bit of a non-event I think, just a publicity stunt.
Swinton are not an insurance company or insurer - they are a broker!
All this means is that they will try to cover your risk through insurers that don't charge a premium for speeding points - however, those insurers may not be the best value for you.
Some insurers have been doing this for a while - I know Liverpool Victoria was doing this 3 years ago when I was insuring the M5 they asked me if I had any points on my license. I said I had two SP30's, and they told me they were only interested in non-SP endorsements.
Swinton are not an insurance company or insurer - they are a broker!
All this means is that they will try to cover your risk through insurers that don't charge a premium for speeding points - however, those insurers may not be the best value for you.
Some insurers have been doing this for a while - I know Liverpool Victoria was doing this 3 years ago when I was insuring the M5 they asked me if I had any points on my license. I said I had two SP30's, and they told me they were only interested in non-SP endorsements.
Took the words right out of my mouth. As a motor underwriter, I decide what factors I use to rate a risk, not Swinton. I still think that someones licence history is a rating factor. Generally, I would not be too worried about a driver with a couple of 'isolated' SP30's, but if that history shows the driver is consistantly getting these convictions, or shows other non SP convictions, I would rate accordingly. Someone averaging one sp30 every couple of years is a higher risk than someone with none. If they are not spotting the speed camera's whilst driving, what else are they missing? That child between the parked cars?, that cyclist with dark clothing on?
A friend of mine, a real gentleman in his late 50's, clean driving record for 30+ years, no accidents or any such like, got 9 points in 3 weeks on his license for speeding.
Every Sunday morning at about 8.45, he drove down a dual carrigeway as part of his route to church. He didnt realise that a new 'saftey' camera had been put on it, and three weeks running he was caught doing around 57mph in the 50 zone. On a Sunday morning, when the normally busy section of road was empty. Not many people go to church these days you know.
He only realised a camera had been put up when he got his first letter. Too late though.
Personally, I see no sense in it at all. A police patrol would more than likely have ignored him of they had seen his 'offences' on a quiet Sunday morning, I would guess. But lets face it, no police patrol would have been there on a quiet Sunday morning anyway.
The lads in work bought him a detector to help keep him under 12 points.
cpas said:
"And the move reflects a change in attitude by the insurance industry as the estimated number of pointed motorists tops 6 million."
So assumeing only 3 points per driver, that's £360M to the government at £60 a pop! And lots of people have 6 or even 9 points!!!
So assumeing only 3 points per driver, that's £360M to the government at £60 a pop! And lots of people have 6 or even 9 points!!!
and that is why, Im afraid, our friend Paul Smith at SafeSpeed is fighting a War he cant win......with revenues like that at stake,there is no way the accountants that run this Country can afford to back down...still,it cant hurt to ojbect can it ?
rgracin said:
Generally, I would not be too worried about a driver with a couple of 'isolated' SP30's,..... Someone averaging one sp30 every couple of years is a higher risk than someone with none.
Slightly confused,would one sp30 every "couple of years" not come into your "isolated" category ?
Not picking a fight,just interested what sort of yardstick you guys use......I personally cant remember the last time I changed Insurance CO's and was asked the state of my licence ..
A friend of mine, a real gentleman in his late 50's, clean driving record for 30+ years, no accidents or any such like, got 9 points in 3 weeks on his license for speeding.
Every Sunday morning at about 8.45, he drove down a dual carrigeway as part of his route to church. He didnt realise that a new 'saftey' camera had been put on it, and three weeks running he was caught doing around 57mph in the 50 zone. On a Sunday morning, when the normally busy section of road was empty. Not many people go to church these days you know.
He only realised a camera had been put up when he got his first letter. Too late though.
Personally, I see no sense in it at all. A police patrol would more than likely have ignored him of they had seen his 'offences' on a quiet Sunday morning, I would guess. But lets face it, no police patrol would have been there on a quiet Sunday morning anyway.
The lads in work bought him a detector to help keep him under 12 points.
[/quote]
Whilst I sympathise with him, it still raises the question of why he didn't spot the camera after passing it six times (I presume he returned by the same route?).
The point I'm trying to make is that if a driver is not paying enough attention that they miss a camera, there are other potential hazards both static or moving that they could miss regardless of speed.
Every Sunday morning at about 8.45, he drove down a dual carrigeway as part of his route to church. He didnt realise that a new 'saftey' camera had been put on it, and three weeks running he was caught doing around 57mph in the 50 zone. On a Sunday morning, when the normally busy section of road was empty. Not many people go to church these days you know.
He only realised a camera had been put up when he got his first letter. Too late though.
Personally, I see no sense in it at all. A police patrol would more than likely have ignored him of they had seen his 'offences' on a quiet Sunday morning, I would guess. But lets face it, no police patrol would have been there on a quiet Sunday morning anyway.
The lads in work bought him a detector to help keep him under 12 points.
[/quote]
Whilst I sympathise with him, it still raises the question of why he didn't spot the camera after passing it six times (I presume he returned by the same route?).
The point I'm trying to make is that if a driver is not paying enough attention that they miss a camera, there are other potential hazards both static or moving that they could miss regardless of speed.
rgracin said:
mmm-five said:
Bit of a non-event I think, just a publicity stunt.
Swinton are not an insurance company or insurer - they are a broker!
All this means is that they will try to cover your risk through insurers that don't charge a premium for speeding points - however, those insurers may not be the best value for you.
Some insurers have been doing this for a while - I know Liverpool Victoria was doing this 3 years ago when I was insuring the M5 they asked me if I had any points on my license. I said I had two SP30's, and they told me they were only interested in non-SP endorsements.
Swinton are not an insurance company or insurer - they are a broker!
All this means is that they will try to cover your risk through insurers that don't charge a premium for speeding points - however, those insurers may not be the best value for you.
Some insurers have been doing this for a while - I know Liverpool Victoria was doing this 3 years ago when I was insuring the M5 they asked me if I had any points on my license. I said I had two SP30's, and they told me they were only interested in non-SP endorsements.
Took the words right out of my mouth. As a motor underwriter, I decide what factors I use to rate a risk, not Swinton. I still think that someones licence history is a rating factor. Generally, I would not be too worried about a driver with a couple of 'isolated' SP30's, but if that history shows the driver is consistantly getting these convictions, or shows other non SP convictions, I would rate accordingly. Someone averaging one sp30 every couple of years is a higher risk than someone with none. If they are not spotting the speed camera's whilst driving, what else are they missing? That child between the parked cars?, that cyclist with dark clothing on?
Surely that risk should be based on where you live? Down here in darkest Dorset & Wilts we have relatively few cameras per square mile or even 10, go anywhere in the midlands & there are literally thousands of them everywhere every half a mile (going by rough guide - avoid Birmingham at all costs calcs). So a simple how many points do you have is not relative to the risk involved whatsoever, more to do with your locality & aggressiveness of your local parasitic tallyvan establishmentI'd suggest.
Edited by cptsideways on Thursday 17th May 14:08
rgracin said:
A friend of mine, a real gentleman in his late 50's, clean driving record for 30+ years, no accidents or any such like, got 9 points in 3 weeks on his license for speeding.
Every Sunday morning at about 8.45, he drove down a dual carrigeway as part of his route to church. He didnt realise that a new 'saftey' camera had been put on it, and three weeks running he was caught doing around 57mph in the 50 zone. On a Sunday morning, when the normally busy section of road was empty. Not many people go to church these days you know.
He only realised a camera had been put up when he got his first letter. Too late though.
Personally, I see no sense in it at all. A police patrol would more than likely have ignored him of they had seen his 'offences' on a quiet Sunday morning, I would guess. But lets face it, no police patrol would have been there on a quiet Sunday morning anyway.
The lads in work bought him a detector to help keep him under 12 points.
Every Sunday morning at about 8.45, he drove down a dual carrigeway as part of his route to church. He didnt realise that a new 'saftey' camera had been put on it, and three weeks running he was caught doing around 57mph in the 50 zone. On a Sunday morning, when the normally busy section of road was empty. Not many people go to church these days you know.
He only realised a camera had been put up when he got his first letter. Too late though.
Personally, I see no sense in it at all. A police patrol would more than likely have ignored him of they had seen his 'offences' on a quiet Sunday morning, I would guess. But lets face it, no police patrol would have been there on a quiet Sunday morning anyway.
The lads in work bought him a detector to help keep him under 12 points.
Whilst I sympathise with him, it still raises the question of why he didn't spot the camera after passing it six times (I presume he returned by the same route?).
The point I'm trying to make is that if a driver is not paying enough attention that they miss a camera, there are other potential hazards both static or moving that they could miss regardless of speed.
[/quote]
Perhaps he was concentrating on the road, looking for potential dangers and ignoring things which pose no risks? You know, like the way we were taught to drive safely?
Edited by s2art on Thursday 17th May 14:19
Tonyt3 said:
A friend of mine, a real gentleman in his late 50's, clean driving record for 30+ years, no accidents or any such like, got 9 points in 3 weeks on his license for speeding.
Every Sunday morning at about 8.45, he drove down a dual carrigeway as part of his route to church. He didnt realise that a new 'saftey' camera had been put on it, and three weeks running he was caught doing around 57mph in the 50 zone. On a Sunday morning, when the normally busy section of road was empty. Not many people go to church these days you know.
He only realised a camera had been put up when he got his first letter. Too late though.
Personally, I see no sense in it at all. A police patrol would more than likely have ignored him of they had seen his 'offences' on a quiet Sunday morning, I would guess. But lets face it, no police patrol would have been there on a quiet Sunday morning anyway.
The lads in work bought him a detector to help keep him under 12 points.
Every Sunday morning at about 8.45, he drove down a dual carrigeway as part of his route to church. He didnt realise that a new 'saftey' camera had been put on it, and three weeks running he was caught doing around 57mph in the 50 zone. On a Sunday morning, when the normally busy section of road was empty. Not many people go to church these days you know.
He only realised a camera had been put up when he got his first letter. Too late though.
Personally, I see no sense in it at all. A police patrol would more than likely have ignored him of they had seen his 'offences' on a quiet Sunday morning, I would guess. But lets face it, no police patrol would have been there on a quiet Sunday morning anyway.
The lads in work bought him a detector to help keep him under 12 points.
rgracin said:
Whilst I sympathise with him, it still raises the question of why he didn't spot the camera after passing it six times (I presume he returned by the same route?).
The point I'm trying to make is that if a driver is not paying enough attention that they miss a camera, there are other potential hazards both static or moving that they could miss regardless of speed.
OK, so you never heard the argrument that keeping a proper eye out for real risks on the road instead of watching your speedo/looking out for scameras....????
I agree, most people would have spotted it. It was in the days before they turned orange though.
Edited by tony*t3 on Thursday 17th May 14:21
Edited by tony*t3 on Thursday 17th May 14:22
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff