Commercialism rant! (long but worth a read)

ILW

Percy1983 wrote: »

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 feedom and opportunties which come with it?

Until they can afford it.

A pretty good option is to get a moped at 16, insurance is dirt cheap and by the time you are 18 you will have 2 years no claims bonus.

System

Direct Line let you get your own no claims on your parents policy.

Percy1983

Joeskeppi wrote: »

Direct Line let you get your own no claims on your parents policy.

But of course as a named driver you shouldn't be the main driver of any vehicle on the policy.

nicko33

Percy1983 wrote: »

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

Of course they don't assume that. They KNOW that on average older people cost them less in claims than young driver, so they set the premiums appropriate to the risk.

ninky_2

as insurance is compulsory by law i think it could be a state operated system. everyone pays in a set amount, is penalised a set amount and gets compensated a set amount etc. it could work a bit like road tax where there are some differences according to what car you drive etc but not loads of different companies vying to get your business buy offering different rates and different products. the insurance would be on the car not the driver and it would be the registered keepers duty to keep it up to date.

Percy1983

ninky wrote: »

as insurance is compulsory by law i think it could be a state operated system. everyone pays in a set amount, is penalised a set amount and gets compensated a set amount etc. it could work a bit like road tax where there are some differences according to what car you drive etc but not loads of different companies vying to get your business buy offering different rates and different products. the insurance would be on the car not the driver and it would be the registered keepers duty to keep it up to date.

Makes sense, is fair to all involved and doesn't descriminate.

Sounds perfect.

wotsthat

ninky wrote: »

as insurance is compulsory by law i think it could be a state operated system. everyone pays in a set amount, is penalised a set amount and gets compensated a set amount

I think that might work. As it's a state operated system though you might need to budget for that set amount being somewhat more than you pay now.

The government can't put aircraft on aircraft carriers do you really think they can organise car insurance?

JWF

And if it is anything like the tax system, you be over charged, undercharged, then there'll be a complex system of rebates to account for lack of claims which has to be claimed separately from the main tax, etc. etc.

I wouldn't be confident of getting a decent price from a state run scheme!

Loughton_Monkey

ninky wrote: »

as insurance is compulsory by law i think it could be a state operated system. everyone pays in a set amount, is penalised a set amount and gets compensated a set amount etc. it could work a bit like road tax where there are some differences according to what car you drive etc but not loads of different companies vying to get your business buy offering different rates and different products. the insurance would be on the car not the driver and it would be the registered keepers duty to keep it up to date.

You need to remember that the claims cost for, say, a 19 year old is not simply 10% or 20% above that of a 55 year old. You are talking multiples (5 to 10 times). Plus all the drink drivers...

Any system that bascally had total claims cost divided by number of drivers (even adjusted for value of car) would soon have 55 year olds up in arms at the cost.

... So then ultimately, the state sytem would need to be just as complicated. Add to that the lack of competition, bureacracy, inertia, and pure money-wasting in public bodies, it would only take a few years for everyone saying come back old system, all is forgiven!

Would be similar to saying everyone pays £500 a year for elecricity, regardless of usage. Same for water and gas. Or maybe all pay "Train license" of £300 a year, and we all get free travel.

Wouldn't work!

olly300

Percy1983 wrote: »

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.

You seem to have a reading comprehension problem.

Quite a few other posters have pointed out until such a time that an insurance company can distinguish between individuals then they have to use statistics.

BTW the job you do, your country of birth, your marital status, your postcode (where you live), the children you have and having other drivers on your policy is all priced into insurance systems.

The Admiral group got caught out this year for charging significantly more for people who were born aboard regardless of age - even if they moved here when they were babies and therefore were educated and learnt to drive here.