Commercialism rant! (long but worth a read)

lostinrates

PhylPho wrote: »

The 45 years' driving experience that separates us actually does count for something.

Actually, the point occurs to me that not just the years but the mechanical experience. DH became a much better driver when he got his old LR. I had failed to appreciate before that the learning experience of driving with no computers or assistance and having to understand things like a choke had given me before that.

Percy1983

I do keep saying a single insurance company based on my ideas would fail in the current market.

I am calling for a shake up of the market and some regulation.

Back to a question I keep asking, who would be against a 5% rise on there premiums if it meant the sensible and safe of the young drivers (yes they do exist) say get a rebate of anything above £1000 if they prove not to be a liability that year.

As I say there would be restriction on car power etc to be accepted.

I say this not to save myself money as I am well out of the woods with the young person premium tax, but it is in recent enough memory for me to know how hard it was and I geniunely wouldn't mind helping out the young generations.

And yes the above could work if it was a legal requirement of all insurance companies.

PhylPho

lostinrates wrote: »

Actually, the point occurs to me that not just the years but the mechanical experience. DH became a much better driver when he got his old LR. I had failed to appreciate before that the learning experience of driving with no computers or assistance and having to understand things like a choke had given me before that.

Ah, well. . . I can start a recalcitrant Ford Anglia 105E by crawling underneath to hammer the jammed starter motor and I'm still thankful for the invention of tights when it came to mending the Morris Mini Minor's blasted fan belt or what can be done with, er, um, a certain rubber product for stretching over a cracked distributor cap to keep the moisture out, though this was a bit of a sod when a packet of three was down to the last one.

All of which does me a fat lot of good today at our VW Audi main dealers which hits me with a three-figure servicing bill equal to half my income for the entire year of 1966, and at which a nice young man tootles out from a hospital-clean bay to prattle on about how he's just computer liaised with Wolfsburg over non-factored variables in the Passat's Engine Management System.

I tell him the most reliable car I had ever had was a Morris 1000 though for accessibility, the Triumph Herald beat the lot: I used to unclick two bolts in the bodywork of my girlfriend's Herald and the entire front of the car -- not just the bonnet -- lifted up so I could work on the engine.

He looks around to see when the nurse is coming to take me home.

Whoever said knowledge is power didn't get it entirely right. . .

PhylPho

Percy1983 wrote: »

I do keep saying a single insurance company based on my ideas would fail in the current market.

I am calling for a shake up of the market and some regulation.

Back to a question I keep asking, who would be against a 5% rise on there premiums if it meant the sensible and safe of the young drivers (yes they do exist) say get a rebate of anything above £1000 if they prove not to be a liability that year.

I might be wrong, but I seem to recall the concept of the No Claims Bonus existed even in the days when I was driving and a man walked in front carrying a flag.

Percy1983

PhylPho wrote: »

I might be wrong, but I seem to recall the concept of the No Claims Bonus existed even in the days when I was driving and a man walked in front carrying a flag.

Yes the NCB does have a use but for one what is no claims protection about? if you claim or you don't.

I still go back to my previous point yes a few years NCB is a good evidence of being a good driver I won't argue with that, but then why should a male with more years NCB pay more than a female with less years no claims bonus, it assumes ALL females are better than ALL males... (if we are all honest we can agree that is not the case) back to discrimination I see.

A._Badger

Percy1983 wrote: »

Yes the NCB does have a use but for one what is no claims protection about? if you claim or you don't.

I still go back to my previous point yes a few years NCB is a good evidence of being a good driver I won't argue with that, but then why should a male with more years NCB pay more than a female with less years no claims bonus, it assumes ALL females are better than ALL males... (if we are all honest we can agree that is not the case) back to discrimination I see.

Someone on a motoring forum (I forget which) recently posted that s/he used to be frightened of young male drivers. Now s/he is frightened of young female ones. I can only agree.

I have a feeling these insurance company loadings are out of date.

benb76

I think most young/new drivers resent being considered bad drivers more than anything, none of us like to have our driving criticised do we? The thing is that all new drivers are bad drivers in comparison to someone with 10+ years of motoring experience. Granted some are more riskier than others, and it's the ones that don't realise that they're not yet good drivers that are the biggest danger on the road.

Percy1983

benb76 wrote: »

I think most young/new drivers resent being considered bad drivers more than anything, none of us like to have our driving criticised do we? The thing is that all new drivers are bad drivers in comparison to someone with 10+ years of motoring experience. Granted some are more riskier than others, and it's the ones that don't realise that they're not yet good drivers that are the biggest danger on the road.

In general I would agree somebody who has been driving 10 years SHOULD be better than a new driver and will agree in most cases they will be.

On the flip side only using a very small sample there is a few times I have need to shout STOP at red lights with my dad driving yet he still get cheaper quotes than me (more worringly how many times has he gone through red lights when nobody is there). Shockingly he has been in a couple of accidents which are of course never his fault. Now my point is he gets cheaper quotes as most people his age are better drivers and I get worse quotes because most people my age are worse drivers. SO in the case of insurance it assumes ALL older people are better drivers than ALL young drivers, which yet again is clearly not the case (and I am sure many people can confirm me and my dad aren't the only example).

As I keep saying rather than the good drivers paying for the bad drivers within each age band, why not all the good drivers pay for all the bad drivers, as we say with insurance we basically pay for if the worse happens and if that never happens yes you are out of pocket.

But why should a young many get punished just becuase he shares the same features and age as some bad drivers and why should a middle age women not be punished because she shares the same age and features as many good drivers?

ILW

Why not just put off driving for a year or two if you cannot afford the insurance?

Percy1983

Personally I did wait until 20 for that very reason, how long do you think young people should put there lives on hold for before have reasonable car insurance and the freedom and opportunties which come with it?