MPs to debate £1200 insurance cap for under 25s.
Discussion
I cant see the problem with MP's looking into insurance costs as a whole, and for those under 25.
Personally I think the cap should be £2K and be limited to certain groups of cars as has already been mentioned.
Though I feel a better idea would be government backed 3rd party insurance cover, funded by fuel and annual driving licence fees (£100 ?). And if want fully comp cover then go out and pay for it.
Personally I think the cap should be £2K and be limited to certain groups of cars as has already been mentioned.
Though I feel a better idea would be government backed 3rd party insurance cover, funded by fuel and annual driving licence fees (£100 ?). And if want fully comp cover then go out and pay for it.
Gargamel said:
If they limit it to say 2.0 litre cars or below then I see no reason not to. Insurance is mandatory after all. some premiums are just outrageous.
Premiums are outrageous for obvious reasons. No insurance company is going to write insurance at a loss which means they will simply refuse cover. The unintended consequence would be an effective ban on the under 25's from driving interesting cars (in their own name) or ban youngsters who live in s
tty areas from owning a car at all. It's an idiotic idea.
I'm with him. I grew up in a country where having insurance is optional, and I remember young guys just passing their driving test at 18 and buying 2nd hand E36 M3s and the like, or 600/750cc motorcycles or getting turbo conversions on anything and everything, and sadly I loose count of how many were killed in RTAs where they were over-enthusiastic and under-experienced.Premiums are outrageous for obvious reasons. No insurance company is going to write insurance at a loss which means they will simply refuse cover. The unintended consequence would be an effective ban on the under 25's from driving interesting cars (in their own name) or ban youngsters who live in s
tty areas from owning a car at all. It's an idiotic idea.And yet less than a month ago: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/27/insuran...
So the £1000 increase is all a bit "daily mail" but £50-75 increase for everyone sounds more plausible.
I do think there are issues with the insurance industry, but whilst Government/MPs fart about wasting time increasing costs one week and then debating reducing it the next the real issues are unlikely to be tackled.
So the £1000 increase is all a bit "daily mail" but £50-75 increase for everyone sounds more plausible.
I do think there are issues with the insurance industry, but whilst Government/MPs fart about wasting time increasing costs one week and then debating reducing it the next the real issues are unlikely to be tackled.
rossw46 said:
I loose count of how many were killed in RTAs where they were over-enthusiastic and under-experienced.
How many would have still managed to kill themselves in a 1.2! Over enthusiastic and under experience can lead to death even in the slowest car in the world if you drive it incorrectly!There doesn't need to be any engine restrictions brought in or caps on the cost especially extending to 25! By 25 you should dam well have enough money and sense to be able to budget and buy a car you can afford plus if you are any good at driving you should have accrued 5+years NCD thus be able to obtain much cheaper insurance.
For reference, 17 years ago it cost me £800 to insure a 1.0l Fiesta , adjusting for inflation that is about £1200! I could afford that working a part time job whilst in 6th form. The difference today is every 17 year old wants a £900 IPhone, wants a less than 3 year old car, wants £200 jeans, spends £30 for a bowl of chicken and a coke in Nandos and thinks saving for a car is unfair.
98elise said:
Insurance prices are based on how much your risk group costs the insurance company. For it to be caped someone else needs to make up the difference.
Nail/head.How about a cap on travel insurance costs for the over 70s. Let the difference be made up by all these teenagers who pay very little.
oyster said:
Dixy said:
If MPs want to effect the cost how about not taxing it.
I've re-read your post a few times and it still doesn't make any sense.I guess what the poster is alluding to is that if MPs want to reduce premiums - why not reduce that tax or remove it altogether.
aka_kerrly said:
For reference, 17 years ago it cost me £800 to insure a 1.0l Fiesta , adjusting for inflation that is about £1200! I could afford that working a part time job whilst in 6th form. The difference today is every 17 year old wants a £900 IPhone, wants a less than 3 year old car, wants £200 jeans, spends £30 for a bowl of chicken and a coke in Nandos and thinks saving for a car is unfair.
Same here. In 1997, my TPFT premium was £800 on a 10 year old 1.1l fiesta - that's £1336 in today's money. I was 21 at the time too, so dread to think what it would have been had I bought the car at 17 after passing my test.
SKP555 said:
It's not actually as terrible an idea as government imposed price controls usually are.
It would force the insurance companies to think of other ways og limiting the risks posed by young drivers. Perhaps monitoring driving behaviour or limiting cover in other ways.
They already do this.It would force the insurance companies to think of other ways og limiting the risks posed by young drivers. Perhaps monitoring driving behaviour or limiting cover in other ways.
It's a nonsense idea - The average insurance premium for a young driver is high because the average amount of risk posed by a young driver is also high.
M
sidicks said:
They already do this.
It's a nonsense idea - The average insurance premium for a young driver is high because the average amount of risk posed by a young driver is also high.
M
True, but I suspect the risk is highly concentrated within younger drivers and certain behaviours for which other young drivers are penalised. It's a nonsense idea - The average insurance premium for a young driver is high because the average amount of risk posed by a young driver is also high.
M
I think young people do need help these days but I suspect £1200 will be too low unless the government is going to subsidise the scheme somehow. I'm pretty sure I was paying not far off that as a new driver back in 2005 and prices have only gone up since then. I also worry the cost of this would just be pushed onto lower risk drivers making motoring more expensive for all.
They would do well to tackle the no win no fee accident management/whiplash claims industry... but they have just gone an done the opposite by raising the payouts companies have to make to people which will no doubt encourage even more dodgy claims.
How about raising the minimum wage for < 25s so they can afford to pay their way a bit more? Or perhaps moving to a system where the car is insured rather than the named driver as that might decrease uninsured drivers as well.
They would do well to tackle the no win no fee accident management/whiplash claims industry... but they have just gone an done the opposite by raising the payouts companies have to make to people which will no doubt encourage even more dodgy claims.
How about raising the minimum wage for < 25s so they can afford to pay their way a bit more? Or perhaps moving to a system where the car is insured rather than the named driver as that might decrease uninsured drivers as well.
Edited by VolvoT5 on Thursday 23 March 07:12
Moonhawk said:
aka_kerrly said:
For reference, 17 years ago it cost me £800 to insure a 1.0l Fiesta , adjusting for inflation that is about £1200! I could afford that working a part time job whilst in 6th form. The difference today is every 17 year old wants a £900 IPhone, wants a less than 3 year old car, wants £200 jeans, spends £30 for a bowl of chicken and a coke in Nandos and thinks saving for a car is unfair.
Same here. In 1997, my TPFT premium was £800 on a 10 year old 1.1l fiesta - that's £1336 in today's money. I was 21 at the time too, so dread to think what it would have been had I bought the car at 17 after passing my test.
VolvoT5 said:
I think young people do need help these days but I suspect £1200 will be too low unless the government is going to subsidise the scheme somehow. I'm pretty sure I was paying not far off that as a new driver back in 2005 and prices have only gone up since then. I also worry the cost of this would just be pushed onto lower risk drivers making motoring more expensive for all.
They would do well to tackle the no win no fee accident management/whiplash claims industry... but they have just gone an done the opposite by raising the payouts companies have to make to people which will no doubt encourage even more dodgy claims.
How about raising the minimum wage for < 25s so they can afford to pay their way a bit more? Or perhaps moving to a system where the car is insured rather than the named driver as that might decrease uninsured drivers as well.
'Free money for all"...!They would do well to tackle the no win no fee accident management/whiplash claims industry... but they have just gone an done the opposite by raising the payouts companies have to make to people which will no doubt encourage even more dodgy claims.
How about raising the minimum wage for < 25s so they can afford to pay their way a bit more? Or perhaps moving to a system where the car is insured rather than the named driver as that might decrease uninsured drivers as well.
Edited by VolvoT5 on Thursday 23 March 07:12
It has been an age old problem that will always be there. If young people find it too expensive then they aren't serious about driving. 20 years ago I paid £950 3rd party for a battered 13 year old Polo. A huge amount of money considering I earnt £84 a week as an aporentice. I still managed it as driving was a priority for me. It paid off quick as premiums came down quickly if you kept your record clean.
Young drivers don't need anymore help, they just need to realise it was no different from any other generation. In a world where £700 mobile phone contracts and Sky subscriptions is the norm, somehow the benefits of insuring yourself and more importantly insuring others in an accident has been lost.
Young drivers don't need anymore help, they just need to realise it was no different from any other generation. In a world where £700 mobile phone contracts and Sky subscriptions is the norm, somehow the benefits of insuring yourself and more importantly insuring others in an accident has been lost.
menguin said:
14 years ago it cost me £1200 to insure my first car - a 1.3l Polo from 1989. People can either afford to drive or not - imposing an artificial and arbitrary cap on a market that should be defined by risk and cost is stupid especially when if anything insurance costs adjusted for inflation may have even gone down!
That would be fine but since insurance is mandatory it's not a free market anyway. And since it's highly desirable for everyone that young drivers have insurance it makes sense that we should look at ways of making it more affordable. Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff