Do you think car insurance is expensive for young people?

AdrianC

TPO cover makes no difference, because it's the third party claims where are the expensive bit.

No restriction on the insured car is ridiculous - because somebody's FAR more likely to lose control of a Ferrari and hit something, and do a lot more damage when they do.

This £750 excess is going to be "affordable" is it?

And what about when people then don't renew after a claim? We're straight back to where we were with the fine, are we not?

Johnmcl7

PasturesNew wrote: »

Yes it's expensive; cars and the cost of fixing other people's cars you might hit has gone up.

One solution is to select 3-4 cheap, small engined cars, say 500cc, and cap that for younger drivers, without mods. Then have those models heavily promoted so it becomes their "expectation" to drive a 500cc car to build up 1-2 years of no claims bonus ... rather than them thinking "Great, I'll get that souped up turbo like my mate"

It's a frequent suggestion that young drivers should have a low power car to start with but this seems to miss the fact that many teenagers start with cheap, very low powered cars which unfortunately many of them crash. BBC3 I think it was did a good documentary called License to Kill presented by a young lady who was disabled in a car crash when she was younger. She addresses the point about engine power as she was driving a basic Corsa and later speaks to someone whose boyfriend was killed in a crash in a 1.1 Clio.

People also frequently point the motorbike power limit where under certain conditions, new riders are limited to just 33bhp but the situation with motorbikes is very different. 33bhp doesn't sound like much but it's still extremely fast compared to a car, my 'slow' 72bhp bike was capable of out accelerating most vehicles on the road and had comparatively cheap running costs against a car with that sort of performance. For the same price I could have bought and easily run a superbike that would out accelerate just about anything going.

I think it's a difficult question in general to deal with in regards to insurance, insurance companies base the cost on risk and clearly young drivers are an immensely high risk. I don't see a car as a 'right' either, as a young driver I couldn't afford to insure or maintain a decent car so I didn't, waited a few years until the costs came down a bit and I could afford it more comfortably.

John

Joe_Horner

AdrianC wrote: »

TPO cover makes no difference, because it's the third party claims where are the expensive bit.

Not so much for young driver claims. They tend to include a disproportionate number of driving off corners / into trees / on their roofs / misjudging parking spaces and so on. Besides, any reduction in payout risk is a reduction - hit someone in a car park and it becomes a £1k repair to their bumper rather than a £2k repair to two bumpers.

AdrianC wrote: »

No restriction on the insured car is ridiculous - because somebody's FAR more likely to lose control of a Ferrari and hit something, and do a lot more damage when they do.

Not at all. ok, so a Ferrari is an extreme eample, but not many 17 year olds will be buying them anyway. My first car, at 17, was a 2.5 litre BMW auto (0-60 in about 9 seconds and top speed north of 120mph when those were very respectable figures) back in the days when insurers were far more relaxed about that sort of thing. I didn't hit anything because I was well aware that the very reasonable cost I was paying would go through the roof if I did and I wouldn't be able to keep running it.

AdrianC wrote: »

This £750 excess is going to be "affordable" is it?

It's not an excess, it's a renewal.

You get your policy and it's valid for 12 months or until you've made a claim, whichever comes first. That's not usual at the moment but there's no legal or contractual reason against it.

That way, the potential risk attached to your premium is significantly reduced because it won't cover multiple accidents.

If you have that first "oops" you get one more try, which will still be more affordable than current "first time" policies, but which also only applies until your second !!!!-up. Again, the policy is limited to a single incident and then expires.

At that point you've shown yourself to be a serial risk and your premiums get set according to your demonstrated poor record.

AdrianC wrote: »

what about when people then don't renew after a claim? We're straight back to where we were with the fine, are we not?

Not necessarily, there are plenty of other possibilities ranging from loss of licence / extended re-test to an assumption of jail for no insurance.

But, before it's got to that point, we've given them a real and fair chance to abide by the rules and to develop safe road habits rather than assuming they're all going to be idiots in the first place.

Rosemary7391

Are there any figures available for the amounts paid out due to claims on young drivers' insurance policies? I'm just getting lots of sites wanting to sell insurance when I look for them. Seems like this would be very useful information in this debate...

Andybez38

I think car insurance has always been expensive for young drivers. I passed my test in 1988 and paid about £600 then. In today's money that would be well over £1100 now. Don't make it cheaper for younger drivers and expect to make older/experienced drivers foot the bill.

EdGasket

I paid £60 for my car insurance when I was 17 and that was on an Austin Cambridge; you can do a lot of damage with one of those. £60 back then was affordable to me from doing casual work after school.

theoretica

I expect that the answer will be technological. In return for affordable premiums, young drivers will need to put up with Big Brother watching them - with pricing dependent on how much, when and how they are driving and cameras recording any accidents.

Nasqueron

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Soooo many problems with that.

(1) you can't physically extract a fine from someone who has no means of paying it. Unless you're suggesting compulsory live organ donations, which might be seen as a tad extreme.

And yet they are somehow able to keep buying cars and driving illegally - they have money, just need to find the source and then tap it. £1 a month as you say to people like that is worth it to keep doing it. Losing some of their benefits or earnings will focus minds, isn't that the point of "can't pay, we'll take it away"?

Cap_Hero

It is very expensive and should somehow be subsidised imo.

AdrianC

Cap_Hero wrote: »

It is very expensive and should somehow be subsidised imo.

Lovely. Who by?