RE: Government set to spy on us all?
Monday 9th October 2006
ANPR: We've got your numberInsurers are starting to introduce 'black boxes' that can track where and when you drive -- could this be the start of a covert government-sponsored surveillance scheme?
Government set to spy on us all?
Insurance 'black boxes' to provide surveillance for Government?
ANPR: We've got your number
Drivers are now being offered a £50 GPS black box, which will produce a monthly insurance bill based on miles travelled, time of day, type of road, location, and possibly the speed of the vehicle.
Young drivers will be charged £1 per mile if they drive between 11pm and 6pm. Aside from the obvious implications for privacy and civil liberties, the Association of British Drivers (ABD) has warned that this information can also be used for the Government's planned road charging scheme.
An ABD spokesman who participated in the initial 5,000-vehicle trial said: "Insurance premiums are already based on a driver's accident/conviction history, age, the number of miles travelled annually, and the vehicle's insurance group. Why do we need to attempt a micro-managed premium calculation?
"We don't. The Government's own research shows that they are not trusted with an individual's personal journey details by the majority of the British public. The use of 'service providers,' such as insurance companies, is seen as a way around the problem."
Discussion
It looks almost certain this is how they will do road pricing per mile, with the people like the AA talking about insurance per mile, then this surely is gotta be what the goverment are intending....
they are already laying the cables on the motorway for the Reg plate recognition cameras.
This country just gets better, I cant believe it!
they are already laying the cables on the motorway for the Reg plate recognition cameras.
This country just gets better, I cant believe it!
£1 per mile!!! So the average road useage of a car is 10-12,000 a year. So that means young drivers can expect £10-12,000 insurance premiums per year?? Ridiculous!! When I was still counted as a young driver (around 5 months ago) I lived in Carlisle, then Newcastle, at Uni and then working. I regularly popped to Manctester to see my Girlfriend and around the country to see friends. My insurance premium would have been more than my yearly wage before tax!!
Wildfire said:
£1 per mile!!! So the average road useage of a car is 10-12,000 a year. So that means young drivers can expect £10-12,000 insurance premiums per year?? Ridiculous!! When I was still counted as a young driver (around 5 months ago) I lived in Carlisle, then Newcastle, at Uni and then working. I regularly popped to Manctester to see my Girlfriend and around the country to see friends. My insurance premium would have been more than my yearly wage before tax!!
I think it says £1 a mile during the night for young drivers.
Even so it is absolutely typical of the Govt. to do this: milking the motorised cash cow even harder.
It's time for some concerted and serious civil disobedience.
I dont mind this in theory, so long as the pricing is right.
What does scare me is if the data could be used to incriminate a driver - ie by monitoring speed and instantly issue fines, or by placing a driver at the scene of a crime.
It is for this reason we must all fight the government and stand up for our rights. Afterall, a government is supposed to reflect the views of the people, not just implement whatever scheme they want in a dictatorship style.
What does scare me is if the data could be used to incriminate a driver - ie by monitoring speed and instantly issue fines, or by placing a driver at the scene of a crime.
It is for this reason we must all fight the government and stand up for our rights. Afterall, a government is supposed to reflect the views of the people, not just implement whatever scheme they want in a dictatorship style.
jsr said:
I dont mind this in theory, so long as the pricing is right.
What does scare me is if the data could be used to incriminate a driver - ie by monitoring speed and instantly issue fines, or by placing a driver at the scene of a crime.
It is for this reason we must all fight the government and stand up for our rights. Afterall, a government is supposed to reflect the views of the people, not just implement whatever scheme they want in a dictatorship style.
What does scare me is if the data could be used to incriminate a driver - ie by monitoring speed and instantly issue fines, or by placing a driver at the scene of a crime.
It is for this reason we must all fight the government and stand up for our rights. Afterall, a government is supposed to reflect the views of the people, not just implement whatever scheme they want in a dictatorship style.
Why the hell should I pay even more to go work, when my taxes already pay for the road network, my petrol tax coughs up even more and yet there is no other option available to me BUT to use my car.
Its like charging people to travel to work by train, on top of the cost that they already pay for it!
Absurd. no other word for it.
How about taxing airline fuel for once - the most significant transport polluter!!!
I watched the movie V this weekend. Makes you think about were all these laws to 'protect us' are leading. When does 'protection' overstep the boundary to become 'a daconian police state'.
The worst part is that all these laws attack those who can pay and can be easily identified for doing nothing more than paying tax. Those who break some 'minor' law like stabbing a parent to death ouitside his own home and robbery get away scot free.
The worst part is that all these laws attack those who can pay and can be easily identified for doing nothing more than paying tax. Those who break some 'minor' law like stabbing a parent to death ouitside his own home and robbery get away scot free.
Will they be able to link road fund licence to mileage also using these boxes?
I'm sure I am not the only one out there who is priviledged to own more than one car, and is subjected to paying more than once for road tax even though the combined mileage of all my vehicles is less than 15000 miles.
I'm sure that no matter how fairly they advertised they were introducing the pricings, the majority of motorists would end up paying more for their insurance anyway. Funny how that always seems to be the way.
Are they suggesting this scheme should be volentary or mandatory?
I'm sure I am not the only one out there who is priviledged to own more than one car, and is subjected to paying more than once for road tax even though the combined mileage of all my vehicles is less than 15000 miles.
I'm sure that no matter how fairly they advertised they were introducing the pricings, the majority of motorists would end up paying more for their insurance anyway. Funny how that always seems to be the way.
Are they suggesting this scheme should be volentary or mandatory?
Thing is, I don't see how this really helps the risk assessment be any more accurate than the default vehicle/profession/postcode set-up they already have. Surely it's already self-evident that a SDP&C policy will probably have twice-daily weekday journeys in the rush hour and an SDP policy won't?
There will be a few instances in which this isn't the case, but wouldn't the administrative costs of calculating premiums again for this segment be higher than any potential saving?
The other thing is, if I drive in a relaxed, easygoing and safe manner to and from work in the rush hour, and take a similarly easygoing drive to chill out late at night, am I then a higher risk than someone who drives around at midday aggressively, sharply and with poor observation?
Surely the biggest effect on whether I have an own-fault accident or not is my attitude, rather than the quantity of miles I drive or when I drive them. That's why I already have a different insurance profile to someone who is "19, unemployed" or "48, professional/medical".
As such, surely if my insurance company did want to micro-manage my premium, it would make more sense to install a (comparitively) blind accelerometer and compare how smoothly (and how far within the limits of the car) I drive rather than simply logging where I go?
There will be a few instances in which this isn't the case, but wouldn't the administrative costs of calculating premiums again for this segment be higher than any potential saving?
The other thing is, if I drive in a relaxed, easygoing and safe manner to and from work in the rush hour, and take a similarly easygoing drive to chill out late at night, am I then a higher risk than someone who drives around at midday aggressively, sharply and with poor observation?
Surely the biggest effect on whether I have an own-fault accident or not is my attitude, rather than the quantity of miles I drive or when I drive them. That's why I already have a different insurance profile to someone who is "19, unemployed" or "48, professional/medical".
As such, surely if my insurance company did want to micro-manage my premium, it would make more sense to install a (comparitively) blind accelerometer and compare how smoothly (and how far within the limits of the car) I drive rather than simply logging where I go?
[quote]
Surely the biggest effect on whether I have an own-fault accident or not is my attitude, rather than the quantity of miles I drive or when I drive them. That's why I already have a different insurance profile to someone who is "19, unemployed" or "48, professional/medical".
[/quote]
BINGO!
Surely the biggest effect on whether I have an own-fault accident or not is my attitude, rather than the quantity of miles I drive or when I drive them. That's why I already have a different insurance profile to someone who is "19, unemployed" or "48, professional/medical".
[/quote]
BINGO!
So, have I got this right?
Currently, an insurance premium is calculated on the basis of type of car, age of driver, limited/unlimited mileage, and a host of other things. This is the insurance company's risk, and they charge accordingly.
In the brave new world of GPS based insurance, the risk cannot be calculated 'til after the mileage has been done. Only then can a premium be calculated, and the transaction initiated. So, if you don't have a crash/claim in the period for which the premium will eventually be calculated, then the risk must be nil, and therefore the premium is £0.
Bring it on
Paul
NB, somehow I don't think this is how it'll work and, I suspect this change will not be in my interest, so they can foxtrot oscar!!
surely if they produced a bill at the end of the month and charge according to useage, that means that you will be paying for a month when you didn't actually need the insurance, as in, no accidents occured in that month, well done, you didn't need us, here is our bill... I thought the whole point of insurance was it is an estimate as to the likelyhood of you needing to make a claim?! (i.e. we reckon you going on car type etc etc etc we need x amount to cover the risk)
The goverment wants your cash, the insurers want your cash and more than that they want to monitor and control wherever you are or whatever you're doing, just to make sure you don't break the law. And if you do, woe betide you!! Fudge the Goverment and all they stand for. They lie, cheat and dupe us daily into thinking this is all for our own good. I think it's a load of old B_LL_X and i can't wait for the motoring revolt to finally happen. And it will happen one day when the people of this country have finally had enough...wait and see!!!
Rant over Thanks for listening.
Rant over Thanks for listening.
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff