No insurance is OK, say young drivers
Survey shows insurance-free driving is on the rise
One third (30 per cent) of all young drivers have driven without insurance and 13 per cent think it is acceptable to drive without insurance because ‘it doesn’t harm anyone’, according to the RAC Foundation and Max Power revealing the results of a recent survey.
Alarmingly the Max Power survey also found that three-quarters (77 per cent) of people know someone who has driven without insurance and four per cent think it is OK to drive without insurance because premiums are too high.
The RAC Foundation and Max Power aim to dispel the popular myth that driving without insurance is a victimless crime. People who drive without insurance are:
- Six times more likely to drive a non-roadworthy vehicle
- Up to nine times more likely to be involved in an accident
- More likely to be involved in a hit and run collision
- Three times more likely to have been convicted of driving without due care and attention
- Ten times more likely to have been convicted of drink driving.
The RAC Foundation and Max Power have compiled a dossier on uninsured drivers:
- One in ten drivers have been involved in an accident with an uninsured driver.
- The Motor Insurance Bureau paid out £500 million to the victims of uninsured motorists last year. This is paid out of the premiums of honest motorists.
- Approximately five per cent of all motorists now drive uninsured which adds £30 to £60 to the premiums of other motorists.
- Approximately 16 per cent of uninsured drivers get convicted each year.
- Forty-six per cent of Max Power readers believe driving without insurance is irresponsible and selfish with a further 37 per cent saying uninsured drivers should be locked up.
The RAC Foundation would like to see more competition in the insurance business with more effort from some companies to attract young drivers. A number of companies refuse to insure young drivers even though such drivers are their future customers.
A police crackdown on uninsured drivers would also help to solve the problem. Technology will have a role to play and as databases are improved there will be an important role for Automatic Number Plate Recognition Cameras (ANPR) to help the police target uninsured drivers. It would also help to have more traffic police on the roads as a visual deterrent.
The police will also be given the power to seize and, when appropriate, destroy vehicles that are being driven uninsured. Forty-five per cent of Max Power readers support this measure.
Safety campaign Safe Speed welcomed the RAC Foundations revelations about uninsured drivers but warned that the government strategy simply did not add up.
Campaign founder Paul Smith said, "This means that the average uninsured driver will be caught just once every 6.25 years. He'll pay a £200 fixed penalty ticket or have his £500 throw-away car impounded and crushed. But he'll be back on the road in a month or two. He won't even get banned because his licence points will expire after three years -- more than three years before the next time he's caught.
"If the average uninsured driver's insurance premium is £1,000 per annum, he'll save £6,250 in premiums for every £200 fine. His outlay will be just 3.2 per cent of the legitimate total. The government's new plan to seize the cars of uninsured drivers is no better. At present performance we'll seize the average uninsured driver's £500 throwaway car once in 6.25 years. He'll buy another throwaway within a month and will only be off the road for 1 month in 75. This will reduce the proportion of uninsured drivers by less than 0.1 per cent.
"The talk of great possibilities for detecting uninsured driving with Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) is hopelessly optimistic too, considering that the law requires drivers to be insured while vehicles have number plates."
Smith said, "Uninsured driving is way out of control and the present levels of policing are a million miles from solving the problem. Radical solutions are needed and Safe Speed proposes consideration of charging a third party insurance premium on the cost of motor fuel. This would end uninsured driving overnight. There would be no costs of enforcement. No costs of collection. No offence of uninsured driving. Police and court time would be freed up to deal with other offences. We could even fully preserve the current insurance companies by block purchasing third party policies from existing insurance companies by registration groups.
Smith said: "Uninsured driving is an extremely serious social problem - present and proposed solutions don't even begin to make a dent in it. The numbers don't add up. Fresh thinking is essential if we are to make any progress. Our proposals free up considerable Police and Court resources and end uninsured driving overnight. Surely that's worthy of consideration?"
Safe Speed replied to the recent Department for Transport consultation on uninsured driving, pointing out the numerical impossibility of vehicle seizure as a solution and proposing the inclusion of third party insurance premium on fuel tax. Results from the consultation process have yet to be published.
RAC Foundation director Edmund King said, "Uninsured drivers now account for five per cent of motorists. These drivers cause more accidents and are more likely to be involved in other serious crimes than insured drivers. A higher profile police presence on our roads might help to deter some of the opportunist uninsured who take a calculated risk that they are unlikely to be stopped.
"Sentences also need to act as a deterrent. Many drivers estimate that if they get stopped they might be fined £200, which is often a fraction of their insurance premium. If offenders cannot afford to pay fines, then other appropriate punishments such as community service should be demanded.
"There is also a worry that the problem may be exacerbated as many young drivers believe that they are being priced out of the insurance market. We would like to see more initiatives, such as Max Driver and Pass Plus, with more generous discounts offered to young drivers who participate in extra driver training. Pay as you drive schemes may also help some lower mileage drivers on low incomes."
Max Power editor-in-chief John Sootheran said, "These statistics are frightening, but don’t really surprise me. Typically, young drivers can pay anything from £800 to £2000 a year for motor insurance – and even more if they have a modified car – so, while the fines are just a few hundred pounds, there’s no real incentive to pay a huge insurance premium."
Six times more likely to drive a non road-worthy vehicle
Up to nine times more likely to be involved in an accident
More likely to be involved in a hit and run collision
Three times more likely to have been convicted of driving without due care and attention
Ten times more likely to have been convicted of drink driving."
Nice logic. So if all those chavs would just get insurance their brakes and tires would automatically get fixed and they'd stop boozing?
I hate this kind of nonsense. People should be able to make their own decisions about whether or not they need insurance. And they should be held responsible for their actions - including paying a million pound bill for an accident, if necessary. Why should the government force us to line the pockets of profiteering insurance companies? Why don't they make pedestrians get insurance? Don't peds sometimes cause accidents?
Duncan (who CHOSE to get third party insurance on his mountain bike...)
i know from personal experience that it is a crime that can and does ruin lives.
why on earth don't we remove road tax and have a levvy on petrol that also guarantees a minimum of third party insurance cover applies to every car on our roads.
the little chav scumbags can't avoid paying for petrol, can they? plus, as most fuel caps lock now the little buggers won't be able to nick it easily apart from nicking from one another's battered novas.
Duncanreally said:
"The RAC Foundation and Max Power today aim to dispel the popular myth that driving without insurance is a victimless crime. People who drive without insurance are:
Six times more likely to drive a non road-worthy vehicle
Up to nine times more likely to be involved in an accident
More likely to be involved in a hit and run collision
Three times more likely to have been convicted of driving without due care and attention
Ten times more likely to have been convicted of drink driving."
Nice logic. So if all those chavs would just get insurance their brakes and tires would automatically get fixed and they'd stop boozing?
I hate this kind of nonsense. People should be able to make their own decisions about whether or not they need insurance. And they should be held responsible for their actions - including paying a million pound bill for an accident, if necessary. Why should the government force us to line the pockets of profiteering insurance companies? Why don't they make pedestrians get insurance? Don't peds sometimes cause accidents?
Duncan (who CHOSE to get third party insurance on his mountain bike...)
i admire your libertarian spirit but how does the little oik pay the million pounds in damages? £10 a week court order for the next xxx years?!
knowing someone who was taken off his motorbike by an uninsured driver who did a hit and run (later caught) i have a different take on this. he hasn't been able to work for past 18mnths and still cannot walk and has had several immensely painful ops. his chances of any financial redress are minimal because the oik wasn't insured, has no assets and doesn't work.
i hope you don't experience such a scenario. you may have a somewhat different perspective.
This may well be true, but I dont think that the readers of max power are a fair representation of young people. It gives a good indication of what their readers are like, but not every young person is a max power reader. Additionally, I bet that not every max power reader drives/owns a car.
Having said that, I dont read max power, but I can think of at least two of my friends that have driven without insurance/licence/tax, and one other person that has crashed with none of the above in a friends car!
There is another issue surrounding the pricing strategy for TPO insurance. All cars are put into groups - which group they go in is decided by a number of factors including cost of repair, desirability to thieves and how easy they are to steal. These groups also apply to third party only insurance which keeps the costs artifically high. The only deciding factors in a TPO insurance should be a) how likely you are to crash b) how much damage your car can do to others. This would see a more affordable TPO insurance pricing rate and leaves the indvidual to decide whether to upgrade to TPF&T or fully comp.
As for driving without any insurance - the penalties should be MUCH higher so as to make the risk of being caught one to take note of. Also having a driving without insurance penalty on your licence should not add to any future insurance premiums as it acts as a further deterrent to getting any - this additional cost should be taken into account on the penalty fine.
rude-boy said:
Whilst I like the idea of TP insurance being paid for through a levey on petrol it does concern me that Mr and Mrs Idiot, who each drive like prats and have at lease one bump a year between them, will be carried by those of us who are a little more careful and/or lucky.
i agree but there has to be a better way than this current system which is clearly not working.
i suggest the proliferation of speed cameras has only compounded the problem. if you are a chav who likes blasting around you know you'll be caught by cameras so why bother having a legitimate car? they can take as many photos as they like and won't be able to trace you so why bother with tax, insurance, etc.
"may as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb" as my grandad used to say (not in this context but you know what i mean).
and the obvious irony the system has NEVER been able to understand is how can it be a deterrent that you the offender (if caught) will be banned from driving if you havent' got a licence and/or don't care!? they stroll sneering out of court and jump straight into another nova.
should be an automatic jail sentence if caught. that MIGHT deter them.
doh! why is the system so spineless and weak? how much government time/money etc was expended on bloody fox hunting when we have fundamental things like this in society that actually matter. because it's too hard that's why.
st tony bliar is too busy kneeling at the altar of political bloody correctness.
oppressed mass said:
Driving uninsured is a victimless crime - Crashing uninsured however is not.
There is another issue surrounding the pricing strategy for TPO insurance. All cars are put into groups - which group they go in is decided by a number of factors including cost of repair, desirability to thieves and how easy they are to steal. These groups also apply to third party only insurance which keeps the costs artifically high. The only deciding factors in a TPO insurance should be a) how likely you are to crash b) how much damage your car can do to others. This would see a more affordable TPO insurance pricing rate and leaves the indvidual to decide whether to upgrade to TPF&T or fully comp.
As for driving without any insurance - the penalties should be MUCH higher so as to make the risk of being caught one to take note of. Also having a driving without insurance penalty on your licence should not add to any future insurance premiums as it acts as a further deterrent to getting any - this additional cost should be taken into account on the penalty fine.
Very good points.
Here in Hungary the third party insurance is separate from fully comp. You must carry the 'certificate' for the 3rd party insurance along with your car papers, and there are random paper checks by the police. You can then choose to buy fully comp from any insurer, not just the one you have 3rd party with. Works well, it is pricy here but there is a huge amount of car crime and lots of accidents.
g0kyk said:
All motor vehicles have to display a current road tax disc. It would only be the cost of a piece of paper for insurance companies to issue a similar insurance disc that must be displayed on the windscreen.
A simple way to identify un-insured vehicles or is this too simple.
This is as they do it in Oz(AFAIK) the person is insured not the car and therefore they can drive any car as long as they display their insurance details in the windscreen.
g0kyk said:
All motor vehicles have to display a current road tax disc. It would only be the cost of a piece of paper for insurance companies to issue a similar insurance disc that must be displayed on the windscreen.
A simple way to identify un-insured vehicles or is this too simple.
Do you know nothing!?!?!?!?
This is far too simple, easy to introduce and Police. It is also only, say, 75% effective as there will be situations were someone is a named driver but their details are not on the barcode info the Officer/warden can scan. It would therefore never be put into practice.
No we will have to wait until an idea is developed which will add at lease £100 to premiums, be totally oppresive and be doubtless linked to the number of miles driven, etc.
As I like to refer to it the "Pick-axe to crack a nut" solution - Too heavey handed and not the right tool to be looking at in the first place!
t (the gear lever and gearbox after the head on collision by the idiot who was driving down the wrong side of the road for a dare was somewhere between the back seats) He had no insurance, no licence, no MOT and no money and an unroadworthy car. I believe thst a compulsory prison sentence is the only way to get some these idiots off the road, and even then it won't work completely. but it would be a start!cdp said:
Realistically put 3rd party on petrol. I know it penalises us but it would be worth it.
Why do people keep suggesting we add more to Petrol FACT: 80p in the £ of petrol IS TAX
The Goverment is taking over £35bn (old figures - probably more now) from the motorist every year, and expect us to be grateful when the spend £10bn over 5 years building bus lanes and 'Traffic calming' schemes that have to be ripped out after 6 months.
The fact is insurance premuims have risen to the point where the deterant in much easier to live with. Basically the punishment needs to be at least twice as bad as the premuim. Telling a scrote that he will be fined £200 pound, which he hasn't got, and banning him from driving is meaningless, he'll carry on driving.
Bottom line....
STOP BLOODY COMING UP WITH WAYS TO PUNISH ME FOR SOMEONE ELSES CRIME!!!!
What would be the point of building up a no claims bonus?
At least under the present system soemone with a good claim history can very quickly find their insurance bill becoming very reasonable.
The solution to the problem of Uninsured drivers is quite simply. More Police Checks and stiffer penalties for those caught.
You see, these cards would contain information on the driver that could then be linked to the central insurance database at all times, so entering the details would tell you not only whether the driver was insured, but also whether they were insured to drive that particular car at that particular time.
If they did this, yes, it would cost money to implicate, but insurance prices would eventually come down as it would be much easier to tell who was driving without insurance, and whilst it may be easy to forge a card, when that card is run through a database on-the-spot and can prove whether or not it's legally driven, the forgers would have real trouble.
Also, I think an MOT disc wouldn't go amiss. I know the tax disc is only available with an MOT certificate, but that doesn't stop dodgy garages being slipped a tenner to provide a clean bill of health for a car that clearly isn't roadworthy, yet still has a tax disc.
apache said:
Why is everyone assuming a teenager is a chav or criminal, tried insuring your 17 year olds first car yet?
Insurance has become stupidly unobtainable so these first time drivers are being penalised before they have a chance to earn any NC
Fair point - see earlier note on the inflated price of TP insurance...
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff