RE: If they Move, Bill 'em
RE: If they Move, Bill 'em
Wednesday 1st September 2004

If they Move, Bill 'em

Ian Eveleigh ponders the wonders of pay-as-you-drive insurance


Motor insurance is not one of my favourite subjects at the best of times. It is even less so at the moment, what with being in the middle of a lengthy claim process following the rear-ending of my car a couple of months ago. Usual story: the other driver slipped into a coma of over-familiarity on the approach to a roundabout.  I then get my patience severely tested as my insurer demonstrates a level of uncoordinated incompetence not seen since Bambi first trotted onto a frozen lake.

The renewal quote two hundred quid higher than last year's premium – even though my name has been cleared of any blame – was a nice touch, too. They won't, of course, be getting my money, but that's nothing unusual. I have so far never managed to give the same insurer my custom for two years in succession because, inevitably, come renewal time they will be asking for more than they did the year before. No doubt the hope is that I will have recently heard (and swallowed) some sob story about rising repair costs and personal injury claims but, call me stubborn, when the car's the same and I have yet another fault-free year under my belt, I simply refuse to pay more than the year before.

Tedium

So every 12 months I trawl around the insurance companies, a painful couple of hours split approximately 50:50 between being on hold and being asked how frequent my bowel movements are, before being given a quote so laughably high that, were it the only option, public transport really would start to look appealing. This time last year they may have been promising good deals for every performance car owner, but now they're only offering cover to 47-year-old non-smoking, church-going females called Annabelle doing under 250 miles a year in a blue Kia Rio.

Eventually, usually by about the eighth phone call, a company will be found displaying some common sense (or a desperate need to snare some new customers), offering a quote which doesn't expect me to single-handedly fund one of its annoying prime-time TV adverts.

It's a silly game, but at least the unwritten rules are clear. It's easy to tell which insurers are trying it on and which ones are trying to get your business.

Pay as You Drive

Things could be about to get a good deal more complicated, though. Not convinced that it can always quote us happy by calculating the risk of a driver-and-car combo the old-fashioned way, Norwich Union is currently running trials of a pay-as-you-drive insurance scheme called, cunningly, "Pay As You Drive". The idea is that your car will be fitted with a GPS-equipped black box which will tell tales about where you drive and park. Your premium will then be calculated based upon where you've been and when.

Kinda tempting if you think you only travel through the right parts of town at the right time of day, you've got to admit. But something doesn't quite add up. With all the information already collected when calculating a premium – your age, driving experience, choice of vehicle, annual mileage, location and no claims bonus – is there really any worthwhile gain to be made in going to the effort of installing this technology in so many cars? Is this in-car Big Brother really being introduced for our benefit; so that we can give our insurers less money?

Complicated

That remains to be seen, but one thing that is already certain is that it'll be great at muddying the waters. Would you ever bother to add up 12 months' worth of varying payments to see how the total compares with a conventional policy? With such a complicated calculation process how can you possibly know if one provider of such a scheme is going to work out cheaper for you than another? And aren't you always going to remember that one month where you only paid £8.50?

Initial savings, accompanied by ignorance and indifference, could all too easily result in such a means of calculating premiums becoming widespread. Meanwhile the more sceptical of us would be caught up in the wake: choose not to sign up and you'll be penalised, the assumption being that you've got something to hide.

And what comes next? I'm sure I'm not the first person to realise that if right data is logged you could gain a pretty good idea of how someone drives – and make some pretty rash assumptions about their level of skill based on those figures. Before you know it, or maybe even without you knowing it, how fast you accelerate, how hard you brake, and how often you exceed the speed limit could all be factors used when calculating your bill.

Oh yes, and your insurer would also know exactly what you were up to prior to any accident, too... but they wouldn't use information like that against you. Would they?

Author
Discussion

Nightmare

Original Poster:

5,277 posts

306 months

Wednesday 1st September 2004
quotequote all
great article.... have already seen a news item on TV where they spoke to a spokesperson (funnily enough) for Norwich Union who said...."we wont take any action initially against drivers who break speed limits or other rules"

the word 'initially' was somewhat chilling......

RickH

1,703 posts

270 months

Wednesday 1st September 2004
quotequote all
Excellent article. Sums up the fears and questions of rather a large group of people I reckon.

I for one would be decidedly unimpressed if this was forced upon me.

rich-uk

1,431 posts

278 months

Wednesday 1st September 2004
quotequote all
How easy is it to block a GPS signal?

deeen

6,260 posts

267 months

Wednesday 1st September 2004
quotequote all
rich-uk said:
How easy is it to block a GPS signal?


Got any tinfoil?

Munter

31,330 posts

263 months

Wednesday 1st September 2004
quotequote all
rich-uk said:
How easy is it to block a GPS signal?


Dear Mr Insurance company,
I had a small accident while maintaining my car, your box is broken, please send another.......

humpbackmaniac

1,898 posts

263 months

Wednesday 1st September 2004
quotequote all
I can't comment on the ifs and buts of the story but can say that the company I work for are working with these and other insurance companies in offering navigation and emergency services support via our systems to the driver insured. As an added safety benefit to the pay as you drive policy holders, no more getting lost.
A single call to the control centre following a single vehicle accident on a country lane for example and in seconds the person at the end of the phone knows where you are, and can direct in emergency services.
The technology could well be used as you say to calculate speed. (But could be argued on accuracy.Ahem)
It could also be used to find a stolen vehicle, or at least where the vehicle was when the GPS box was removed. And no more worrying about where the missus is on a late night.
I am biased but can see benefits more than penalties. It won't be the only form of insurance in the future, simply a cost option for those driving minimal miles.

PetrolTed

34,461 posts

325 months

Wednesday 1st September 2004
quotequote all
Unfortunately the benefits will outweigh the problems. The problem is going to be "you were doing 75mph in a 70 zone, we won't pay out."

How do you argue against that?

humpbackmaniac

1,898 posts

263 months

Wednesday 1st September 2004
quotequote all
I believe the tracking data to accomplish that will be a good few years away yet. It is simple GPS beacon with track logging not that level of data logging.
At this stage.

victormeldrew

8,293 posts

299 months

Wednesday 1st September 2004
quotequote all
At this stage. Initially.

Not surprising there are doubts! NU are investing a lot in this (I've seen the newsletters - stay close to your enemies!). Why? To gain market share when they are already market leaders? Or just because they can see the potential of the technology to line their pockets - both on premiums collected and more lucratively on claims refused.

mybrainhurts

90,809 posts

277 months

Wednesday 1st September 2004
quotequote all
A rather dangerous risk for the insurer, I would have thought.

At present, they roughly know their revenue flow.

So what happens in the case of fuel rationing or a mass voluntary pause in car use?

Everyone stops.....premiums stop.

chickensoup

469 posts

277 months

Thursday 2nd September 2004
quotequote all
HOW DO YOU GET AN INSURANCE QUOTE UNDER THIS SYSTEM?
Even different brokers on the same underwriter currently quote different prices. This just seems a way to stop you shopping around.

Who trusts the insurance industry (always so hard done by and hit by big payouts) to look after you when they have this GPS cartel.

"we would love to quote you on insurance, but it depends where and when you drive your car. Give us a travel plan for the next 12 months and we will supply a quote"

Graham66

850 posts

306 months

Thursday 2nd September 2004
quotequote all
mybrainhurts said:
A rather dangerous risk for the insurer, I would have thought.

At present, they roughly know their revenue flow.

So what happens in the case of fuel rationing or a mass voluntary pause in car use?

Everyone stops.....premiums stop.


Do you really think that being parked up will not incur a charge? Look how much they increase the policy if you park on the road instead of in a garage then tell me that not driving your car will not incur a cost, these are insurance companies with investors to pay out profits to, they are not charities and we are customers (i.e. the cash providers) and so they do not do us favours, they simply find new ways to get our money - all IMHO of course

Graham

BliarOut

72,863 posts

261 months

Thursday 2nd September 2004
quotequote all
I believe the additional data will merely be used to find ways of wriggling out of a claim.

"Sorry sir, but it appears that you were travelling at 65MPH, and our sensors indicate that rain may have occured on that day.We have no choice but to refuse your claim as you were driving recklessly"

They already try and refuse paying up because you were wearing a loud shirt or stepped on the cracks in the pavement. Sorry, but I don't have sufficient trust in insurance companies to ever even contemplate this.

adrianr

822 posts

306 months

Friday 3rd September 2004
quotequote all
The scheme has merits for low mileage or local users, same as pay-as-you-go mobile phones... why pay a large annual or monthly charge if your car spends most of its time garaged?

Comparing quotes would be similar to phones as well... 1.5p/mile peak/city centre, 0.5p/mile off peak/open road?

AdrianR


mybrainhurts

90,809 posts

277 months

Friday 3rd September 2004
quotequote all
Graham66 said:

mybrainhurts said:
A rather dangerous risk for the insurer, I would have thought.

At present, they roughly know their revenue flow.

So what happens in the case of fuel rationing or a mass voluntary pause in car use?

Everyone stops.....premiums stop.



Do you really think that being parked up will not incur a charge? Look how much they increase the policy if you park on the road instead of in a garage then tell me that not driving your car will not incur a cost, these are insurance companies with investors to pay out profits to, they are not charities and we are customers (i.e. the cash providers) and so they do not do us favours, they simply find new ways to get our money - all IMHO of course

Graham


You're quite right, but the point I'm making is that, if enough people remain stationary for long enough, it's going to knock a hole in NU's profits.

And how do they budget for that?

thirsty33

250 posts

258 months

Saturday 4th September 2004
quotequote all
They will stitch us up like kippers - they WILL find ways to determine accurately enough your speed and they WILL refuse to pay out. Big brother pith off I say. They could not give a XXXX about being fair, they just want to make more money. Their ultimate goal is that you actuallly pay for exactly the damage you will cause, plus profit; once their crystal ball is fully perfected, we won't need to bother with insurance at all, just "pay as you go". Maybe people would drive more carefully!

spiceman

61 posts

265 months

Wednesday 8th September 2004
quotequote all
I agree thirsty, having seen the very same system used in countries with no regulations it coud be the ultimate big brother. It is a very possible job to wire your car completly, every sensor will feed information, camera and sound can also be easily built in. Your car can even be controlled from the base station. A deterrent yes - you will obey! Its quite expensive to run - but enough volume?

karll

59 posts

262 months

Wednesday 8th September 2004
quotequote all
i work for a company which makes such devices and there is no way i would want some one watching my every move, not to mention the fact that a mobile fitter will need to come and fit said product to said vehicle more than likely breaking clips and marking trim. Then the unit will probably need a service call at least once a year,

ed.

2,176 posts

260 months

Thursday 9th September 2004
quotequote all
It would bring up an interesting situation everytime it loses a signal:

was it done on purpose or just enviromental?
and since you would not be paying, does that mean you are un-insured?

Its not like insurance companies are known for giving the benefit of the doubt.

stevie111s

123 posts

257 months

Thursday 9th September 2004
quotequote all
I can't see it happening ... imagine every year having to have the units changed as you shop around for a different insurance provider. Also, imagine the volume of data that would need to be recorded on computer systems ... this is serious data quantities that has to be transmitted and saved. Also, nothing to stop you (accidentally) cutting the live supply!!!!