Let's not bother with 'speed awareness courses'
Discussion
If I am ever in the position that one of these Micky Mouse courses is offered, I will tell them to stick it up their arse, take the points and fine on the chin and move on.
The state oppression is bad enough without condoning it
The state oppression is bad enough without condoning it
Edited by Lordglenmorangie on Monday 19th November 03:50
Mr E said:
I assume they must ask a specific question regarding "attending speed awareness courses"?
I'm intrigued by a couple of things on this.1)Do the police keep records of who they've given an awareness course to, and do they keep it in the PNC?
2)If they do keep a record, is there any way for the insurance company to find out that there is a record, notwithstanding the DPA?
There's some 'interesting' viewpoints in that thread. As it's semi-degenerated into another slanging match, maybe we could continue some discussion, here.
I received an NIP in the post this week. 57 in a 50. I know the day it happened as I was rushing to a wedding. Fair cop - although I'm annoyed with myself for missing the mobile unit as I consider myself to be very observant.
I've bascially been informed that the 'alleged offence' carried up to a £1000 fine and between 3-6 points on my licence. However, I've been offered the option of two courses. One is a speed awareness course and the other is a 'What's driving us' (non-speed related) course.
The former is 4 hours long and £80 and the latter is 3 hours long and £85. Normally, I'd save the time and spend the extra but part of me is genuinely interested in what they would have to say in the SAC.
Based on what I've read in the other thread and original news link, opting for the latter course may be the more sensible option under the circumstances - even though the other course may provide some insight/knowledge.
Anyon else in a similar position?
I received an NIP in the post this week. 57 in a 50. I know the day it happened as I was rushing to a wedding. Fair cop - although I'm annoyed with myself for missing the mobile unit as I consider myself to be very observant.
I've bascially been informed that the 'alleged offence' carried up to a £1000 fine and between 3-6 points on my licence. However, I've been offered the option of two courses. One is a speed awareness course and the other is a 'What's driving us' (non-speed related) course.
The former is 4 hours long and £80 and the latter is 3 hours long and £85. Normally, I'd save the time and spend the extra but part of me is genuinely interested in what they would have to say in the SAC.
Based on what I've read in the other thread and original news link, opting for the latter course may be the more sensible option under the circumstances - even though the other course may provide some insight/knowledge.
Anyon else in a similar position?
Given that almost every driver in the land breaks a speed limit more than four times in three years, almost every driver in the land qualifies for a totting up ban.
The insurance companies should, therefore, penalise us all by adding £1 to every premium. This would more than cover their greedy, grubby quest for undeserved profits.
The insurance companies should, therefore, penalise us all by adding £1 to every premium. This would more than cover their greedy, grubby quest for undeserved profits.
davepoth said:
I'm intrigued by a couple of things on this.
1)Do the police keep records of who they've given an awareness course to, and do they keep it in the PNC?
2)If they do keep a record, is there any way for the insurance company to find out that there is a record, notwithstanding the DPA?
If it isn't actually an offence - is it "recordable" or whatever? - then I can't actually see how an insurance company can get at this information as it would surely be covered by the DPA?1)Do the police keep records of who they've given an awareness course to, and do they keep it in the PNC?
2)If they do keep a record, is there any way for the insurance company to find out that there is a record, notwithstanding the DPA?
I think these insurance companies are such money-grabbing slimeballs - they sicken me.
OK - so someone who has been caught speeding is more of a risk? What a load of old b
ks - show me somebody who has never exceeded the speed limit and I'll show you a liar. There are two sorts of drivers: those who have been caught speeding and those who haven't. And as to the speed awareness course - IMO they should be dropping premiums - it's driver education after all. A spokesperson for Admiral told the BBC's 5 live Investigates programme: "Although a speed awareness course is a replacement for penalty points, it does not change the fact that the person involved has committed a speeding offence."
"Our claims statistics show that drivers who have committed a speeding offence could be a higher risk than drivers who do not commit speeding offences.
"This means that people attending a speed awareness course are more likely to make a claim and we price these risks accordingly," the company said.
The insurance group says its statistics show that drivers who have attended a course, pose a higher risk.
That is a blatent lie. To come to such a conclusion, Admiral would have had to have been collecting data re those who've been on a speed awareness courses for at least 5 years. As they haven't been, they can't possibly have data to make such a claim.
"Our claims statistics show that drivers who have committed a speeding offence could be a higher risk than drivers who do not commit speeding offences.
"This means that people attending a speed awareness course are more likely to make a claim and we price these risks accordingly," the company said.
The insurance group says its statistics show that drivers who have attended a course, pose a higher risk.
That is a blatent lie. To come to such a conclusion, Admiral would have had to have been collecting data re those who've been on a speed awareness courses for at least 5 years. As they haven't been, they can't possibly have data to make such a claim.
This is interesting as i was under the impression that having 3 point and a £60 fine for an SP30 had little or no affect on your premium. It certainly didn't affect mine by much, it was actually lower come renewal time with the point. I was 19 at the time though, so i was at the stage when my premiums dropped substantially year on year.
If the article is correct and insurance premiums are rising by as much as £300 after going on a course, coupled with the course being more expensive in the first place, i can see these becoming very unpopular in the future. I suppose we might get a situation where, as the poster above alluded too, you are offered a non-speed related course as an option which will not (for a while!) be picked up by the insurance companies.
If the article is correct and insurance premiums are rising by as much as £300 after going on a course, coupled with the course being more expensive in the first place, i can see these becoming very unpopular in the future. I suppose we might get a situation where, as the poster above alluded too, you are offered a non-speed related course as an option which will not (for a while!) be picked up by the insurance companies.
robinessex said:
"Our claims statistics show that drivers who have committed a speeding offence could be a higher risk than drivers who do not commit speeding offences.
"This means that people attending a speed awareness course are more likely to make a claim and we price these risks accordingly," the company said.
Glad Admiral don't write any form of scientific papers. Some dubious wording/conclusions drawn there!"This means that people attending a speed awareness course are more likely to make a claim and we price these risks accordingly," the company said.
mybrainhurts said:
Given that almost every driver in the land breaks a speed limit more than four times in three years, almost every driver in the land qualifies for a totting up ban.
The insurance companies should, therefore, penalise us all by adding £1 to every premium. This would more than cover their greedy, grubby quest for undeserved profits.
To be devil's advocate for a moment, if you have been caught you have failed to notice the speed trap so are less observant than those who do. Therefore it's not the act of speeding but the fact you were caught that makes you riskier?The insurance companies should, therefore, penalise us all by adding £1 to every premium. This would more than cover their greedy, grubby quest for undeserved profits.
The chap who did our course claimed that something like 90% of people who do this course don't get caught speeding again which rather flies in the face of Admiral's assertion.
Personally, speed is not the issue, per se, it is where people speed. If you speed in a 30, you should get the points. There should be some form of qualitative sifting for the remainder.
Personally, speed is not the issue, per se, it is where people speed. If you speed in a 30, you should get the points. There should be some form of qualitative sifting for the remainder.
Rather misleading headline - they aren't penalising people for doing the course, they're penalising people for having a speeding conviction. Seems perfectly reasonable to me, I'm certain that people who get caught speeding are statistically more likely to make an insurance claim, regardless of whether they take points or the course.
Tribal Chestnut said:
Torquey said:
You should get points and be made to do the course.
What an imbecilic thing to write.The imbecilic thing is getting caught speeding.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff