Telematics a con?

Telematics has been around for several years now. The figures I see quoted about the accident rate for young drivers has not changed since most have been forced to have telematic devices as part of their insurance.

Presumably there is evidence that such devices improve the driving of young drivers and hence they have less crashes. Therefore, the cost of insurance with Telematics should have come down. Based on my experience with my children, this is not the case.

So as young drivers expect to pay high premiums, are insurance companies just using them to bolster their profits?
«1

Comments

  • AdrianC
    AdrianC Posts: 42,189
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Forumite
    MiniDriver wrote: »
    Telematics has been around for several years now. The figures I see quoted about the accident rate for young drivers has not changed since most have been forced to have telematic devices as part of their insurance.

    Presumably there is evidence that such devices improve the driving of young drivers and hence they have less crashes. Therefore, the cost of insurance with Telematics should have come down. Based on my experience with my children, this is not the case.

    So as young drivers expect to pay high premiums, are insurance companies just using them to bolster their profits?
    By telematics, I presume you mean insurance "black boxes"?

    They aren't intended to reduce the number of crashes. They are intended to allow insurers to better predict which drivers will be involved in those crashes, so reduce premiums for the ones who won't.

    If your childrens' insurance premiums aren't reducing, then it's probably because of what is being shown about their driving.
  • motorguy
    motorguy Posts: 22,452
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    Forumite
    AdrianC wrote: »
    By telematics, I presume you mean insurance "black boxes"?

    They aren't intended to reduce the number of crashes. They are intended to allow insurers to better predict which drivers will be involved in those crashes, so reduce premiums for the ones who won't.

    If your childrens' insurance premiums aren't reducing, then it's probably because of what is being shown about their driving.

    +1

    Thats it wholly.
  • My (now 18 yo) daughter has a telematics device fitted to her car. Her second year insurance premium (after having completed one year with the telematics device) is around 50% of the first year cost (when taking in to account the "cashback" she gets credited to a pre-paid card for good driving). The difference between how she drives and her elder sister (who was never required to have a telematics device) is significant!
  • forgotmyname
    forgotmyname Posts: 32,517
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Forumite
    Thats strange because my little ones insurance this year was actually more expensive with the black boxes.

    Why do i think the people that designed the software to determine premiums were jokers and made the algorithm so random nobody could work out their actual premium.

    Pretend i have 50 years no claims instead of none, result a dearer qute than zero no claims?

    Pretend i have had no claims, result a dearer quote than if you had claims?
    Censorship Reigns Supreme in Troll City...

  • Car_54
    Car_54 Posts: 8,180
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Forumite
    Thats strange because my little ones insurance this year was actually more expensive with the black boxes.

    Why do i think the people that designed the software to determine premiums were jokers and made the algorithm so random nobody could work out their actual premium.

    Pretend i have 50 years no claims instead of none, result a dearer qute than zero no claims?

    Pretend i have had no claims, result a dearer quote than if you had claims?

    Maybe the quotes aren't random, but the software spots the comedians who get multiple quotes and penalises them accordingly.;)
  • Thats strange because my little ones insurance this year was actually more expensive with the black boxes.

    Your little one's insurance is more expensive because the insurer can see how they drive, perhaps? My elder daughter should be thankful she's not asked to have one fitted.
  • Jlawson118
    Jlawson118 Posts: 1,132
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Forumite
    I've heard on numerous occasions of people being scammed by these black boxes. A friend was telling me a few years ago somebody he knows was driving through the city centre and had to break heavily when somebody stepped out in front of her car. The insurance company noted this exact incident and gave her a 'fine' for it. Although I do know you can get insurance companies that don't fine you for things like that but they will knock off your insurance if you are a repeat offender. I'm pretty sure she'd have been in more trouble for running a person over, her fault or not.

    Another story was of when the car went in for a service/MOT and they ran the car on the tracks way over 70mph and had their insurance voided for speeding.

    Obviously these are stories I've heard so I don't know if they're true, but they do put me off having a box. I paid £1000 extra last year to just not have one, my family were against the idea of me having a box installed too. They seem like more hassle than what they are worth
  • takman
    takman Posts: 3,876
    Combo Breaker First Post
    Forumite
    Jlawson118 wrote: »
    I've heard on numerous occasions of people being scammed by these black boxes. A friend was telling me a few years ago somebody he knows was driving through the city centre and had to break heavily when somebody stepped out in front of her car. The insurance company noted this exact incident and gave her a 'fine' for it. Although I do know you can get insurance companies that don't fine you for things like that but they will knock off your insurance if you are a repeat offender. I'm pretty sure she'd have been in more trouble for running a person over, her fault or not.

    So a friend of a friend told you they got "fined" for braking hard. They probably forgot to tell your friend about all the other times they had braked hard. None of the insurance companies will penalise someone for braking hard once.
    Jlawson118 wrote: »
    Another story was of when the car went in for a service/MOT and they ran the car on the tracks way over 70mph and had their insurance voided for speeding.

    Unless you mean a race track then that is a load of rubbish! the speed of the car is measured by GPS so it needs to be moving at that speed, they don't use the wheel speed sensors.
    If they used the wheel speed sensors then the decision could have easily been disputed by getting them to look at the GPS record where the car is stationary.
    Jlawson118 wrote: »
    Obviously these are stories I've heard so I don't know if they're true, but they do put me off having a box. I paid £1000 extra last year to just not have one, my family were against the idea of me having a box installed too. They seem like more hassle than what they are worth

    If you could have saved £1000 then i would have seriously considered having one for at least the first year of driving. Even if you make a few mistakes they wouldn't increase the premium by £1000 so you would have saved money overall.
  • bertiewhite
    bertiewhite Posts: 1,904
    First Post
    Forumite
    Telematics certainly kept my Stepson off the roads at night and kept him within the speed limits because he was paranoid about his premium going up.
  • rudekid48
    rudekid48 Posts: 2,382
    First Post First Anniversary
    Forumite
    MiniDriver wrote: »
    Telematics has been around for several years now. The figures I see quoted about the accident rate for young drivers has not changed since most have been forced to have telematic devices as part of their insurance.

    Presumably there is evidence that such devices improve the driving of young drivers and hence they have less crashes. Therefore, the cost of insurance with Telematics should have come down. Based on my experience with my children, this is not the case.

    So as young drivers expect to pay high premiums, are insurance companies just using them to bolster their profits?

    I can't find the detailed evidence (presumably it's confidential) but this article from Insurance Times from late 2015 makes reference to a 42% reduction in accidents involving young drivers using telematics..

    http://www.insurancetimes.co.uk/carrot-insurance-turns-tragedy-into-award-winning-telematics/1417582.article
    All matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.8K Life & Family
  • 247.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards