2.5 Million Families on £100k/year Don't Feel Rich

mitchaa

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

We have an R reg car, about 11 years old, I think. Perfectly safe, works well. Why shell out for a new one for the sake of it?

I doubt it is safe, I certainly would not be ferrying my child around in such an old car. Perhaps safe at its time, but times and technologies have moved on.

Crumple zones, protection bars, seat belt pretensioners, ABS,ESP, all round airbag protection and so on and on.

This video is 5yrs old already but highlights the points that i was raising about car safety. If you were in the solid heavy old tank of a volvo, you would have undeniably died, had you been in the renault, you would have survived.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3ygYUYia9I

Ask anyone the outcome before seeing the video, they would have said the volvo would have come off better and the renault would have been crushed into a molecule. Ahh, how technologies have changed

I'd feel very embarrassed about driving such an old car, but forgetting that, point number 1. Safety is paramount, especially when you have young children.

NDG, you live in central London, im surprised you even own a car? Maintenance/tax and insurance costs to consider when most of the time you can just jump on the tube?

lostinrates

mitchaa wrote: »

I doubt it is safe, I certainly would not be ferrying my child around in such an old car. Perhaps safe at its time, but times and technologies have moved on.

And yet, 11 years ago children were in cars. Our new old car is around ten years younger than me. I'm also starting to look for another second hand car for me. If I were totally risk adverse I'd probably not get in an old car. Or a car at all. Or walk on public streets. Certainly wouldn't ride horses, or own dogs ...or go on planes, or god forbid helicoptors...............

fedupfreda

PasturesNew wrote: »

The three Ls, no, not location, location, location.... but:

- location
- luck
- licking the right 4rses

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

So true. One of the rare posts I would like to thank twice. Refusal to brown nose holds too many talented people back in this country! (apologies for the delayed response, life got in the way of MSE...;))

fc123 wrote: »

The majority of people I know who earn OK are self employed...not contractors or freelance type of self employed but own business. They have bad and good years but the possibilities to earn well from ones own efforts seem, to me, higher than being PAYE much of the time.

Quite rightly too - and I do not have any problem with anyone earning well when they have taken the risk to set up their own business - they have worked hard, taken the knocks and are entitled to enjoy the rewards. However all too many highly paid managers I see are just good at 'talking the talk' and have no understanding of doing the job themselves. They are so far removed, up in their ivory towers, they have quite forgotten what life is like for those of us at the coal face, so to speak. They are little better than leeches IMO.

mitchaa

lostinrates wrote: »

And yet, 11 years ago children were in cars. Our new old car is around ten years younger than me. I'm also starting to look for another second hand car for me. If I were totally risk adverse I'd probably not get in an old car. Or a car at all. Or walk on public streets. Certainly wouldn't ride horses, or own dogs ...or go on planes, or god forbid helicoptors...............

My childs safety is paramount to me as im sure is the case for all parents.

Why taxi them round in an old car pre Ncap or low Ncap group when you can spend a few £k and ferry them around in a 5 star Ncap car? It's a no brainer to me, and should be right at the top of the list when choosing to strap your child into any car.

If the time comes where you are involved in an accident and your child dies as a result, you may have that £2-3k extra in your account but you'll be using that to bury your child. A bit of a grim view, but prove me wrong. Prove to me that todays safety standards are equal to that of where they were 10-12yrs ago.

The labour government have went health & safety mad as im sure you are well aware of, and for very good reason, we are in a new age. 10-12 yrs ago, you used to walk into a bar and walk out with lung cancer.

NDG is not short of a bob or two, but common sense and logic are out of the window here for me. I dont care what anyone says, carrying your child around in such an old car is not safe. (Or far less safe than where today is at) Just watch the video, (Already 5yrs outdated)

I'll stop the preaching, and get back on topic:D

SingleSue

mitchaa wrote: »

I doubt it is safe, I certainly would not be ferrying my child around in such an old car. Perhaps safe at its time, but times and technologies have moved on.

Crumple zones, protection bars, seat belt pretensioners, ABS,ESP, all round airbag protection and so on and on.

This video is 5yrs old already but highlights the points that i was raising about car safety. If you were in the solid heavy old tank of a volvo, you would have undeniably died, had you been in the renault, you would have survived.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3ygYUYia9I

Ask anyone the outcome before seeing the video, they would have said the volvo would have come off better and the renault would have been crushed into a molecule. Ahh, how technologies have changed

I'd feel very embarrassed about driving such an old car, but forgetting that, point number 1. Safety is paramount, especially when you have young children.

NDG, you live in central London, im surprised you even own a car? Maintenance/tax and insurance costs to consider when most of the time you can just jump on the tube?

God only knows what you would think about mine....an R reg is a new ish car to me!

My best ever car was my Passat, drove like a tank, built like a tank and was strong enough to protect me and my children when a lorry decided he wanted my lane on the motorway..it was getting on by then.

Harry_Powell

lostinrates wrote: »

And yet, 11 years ago children were in cars.

and cars didn't even have seat belts in the back, and if they did no one wore them anyway and kids were allowed to clamber all over the car, yet no one died, well hardly anyone anyway. I might be wrong about the timescale on this, does anyone remember when seatbelts became compulsary?

Anyway, my point is that you can't wrap your kids in cotton wool, everyone has to die sometime. Is it any difference dying, torn to shreds by flying glass and metal when you're 5 than to die in bed at age 80 under a 28 year old blonde !!!!!! star? Well, is it?

SingleSue

It became compulsory for seat belts in the back of cars for children in 1989...for adults in 1991

lostinrates

mitchaa wrote: »

My childs safety is paramount to me as im sure is the case for all parents.

Why taxi them round in an old car pre Ncap or low Ncap group when you can spend a few £k and ferry them around in a 5 star Ncap car? It's a no brainer to me, and should be right at the top of the list when choosing to strap your child into any car.

If the time comes where you are involved in an accident and your child dies as a result, you may have that £2-3k extra in your account but you'll be using that to bury your child. A bit of a grim view, but prove me wrong. Prove to me that todays safety standards are equal to that of where they were 10-12yrs ago.

The labour government have went health & safety mad as im sure you are well aware of, and for very good reason, we are in a new age. 10-12 yrs ago, you used to walk into a bar and walk out with lung cancer.

NDG is not short of a bob or two, but common sense and logic are out of the window here for me. I dont care what anyone says, carrying your child around in such an old car is not safe. (Or far less safe than where today is at) Just watch the video, (Already 5yrs outdated)

I'll stop the preaching, and get back on topic:D

I think your priorities are understandable and admirable. But I do not think it is irresponsible to put a child in an 11 year old well maintained, legal vehicle...especially, as you point out, the chances are the child is not often in it. And when it is, in the london part, is probably moving at not much over walking speed most of the time . TBH I can think of ways of using the money to enhance a child's life and prospects greater than a new car..bu those would be my priorities not yours. Thankfully, the MOT and legal requirement exist to ensure a (legal) minimum safety requirement so reckless hooligans like me can't drive, for example, without working brakes. Sadly, the same legal requirment of basic saftey and legality is not applied to would be parents!

But then, what do I know, I'm not a parent as you say, and I'm sure priorities change hugely.

lostinrates

Harry_Powell wrote: »

and cars didn't even have seat belts in the back, and if they did no one wore them anyway and kids were allowed to clamber all over the car, yet no one died, well hardly anyone anyway. I might be wrong about the timescale on this, does anyone remember when seatbelts became compulsary?

Anyway, my point is that you can't wrap your kids in cotton wool, everyone has to die sometime. Is it any difference dying, torn to shreds by flying glass and metal when you're 5 than to die in bed at age 80 under a 28 year old blonde !!!!!! star? Well, is it?

Cleaver sent me a book which opens with discussion on seatbelts, and the stats showing that when seatbelt wearing became compulsory accidents went up! (US figures). Anyway, I think there is a happy medium to be stuck in risk: taking sensible precaution is of course valid, but risk cannot be eliminated, and perhaps some risk is in some ways good.

Davesnave

mitchaa wrote: »

My childs safety is paramount to me as im sure is the case for all parents.

Why taxi them round in an old car pre Ncap or low Ncap group when you can spend a few £k and ferry them around in a 5 star Ncap car? It's a no brainer to me, and should be right at the top of the list when choosing to strap your child into any car.

You could also argue that I should buy both my adult kids new cars, then. And you're not one of Mr B's alter egos either!

It's funny that impressive video shows a modern Renault. I was briefly following a slightly larger but very new Renault yesterday when it did something which might have killed people in one of those Volvos, I once owned one of those, but disposed of it sharpish because of the terrible handling.

First, the Renault came past us at around 70 in foul visibility and driving rain. Then, when we were close to passing a slip road, it veered across the carriageway in front of us and attempted to cross the concrete verge and grass onto the fast-disappearing slip. Well, it did, but only by leaping into the air! When it touched down (in front of another car) bits flew in all directions and it went all over the road, but from what my passengers saw, it avoided a collision.

In the Volvo, I'm sure there would have been a total loss of control, so the Renault certainly performed there and may have saved lives. However, another thing is very obvious too, which is that if you drive like a total richard-head the odds of being killed are increased immensely.

I'm not an especially good driver, but ask the passengers in that Renault whether they would rather have been in my ten year old 'banger' or the newish Renault yesterday afternoon and I reckon I know what they'd say.(And yes, as usual, I did go round two roundabouts twice before finding my exit, but 'no verges were harmed during the making of the journey!')