young drivers curfew....

Currently reading:
young drivers curfew....

MATT 68 said:
I can see i,m wasting my time trying to get it into your head! for the final time, NOBODY IS BEING FORCED TO TAKE THIS OFFER UP. IT IS ENTIRELY YOUR OWN CHOICE.IF YOU DONT AGREE WITH IT, DONT DO IT. IF YOU THINK IT WOULD SUIT YOU THEN PERHAPS TAKE OUT THE POLICY. Do you understand now ive spelt it out in big red letters for you?:confused:

If that doesn't get the message across then nothing will :p

Think of it this way Jay. When you take out your insurance you have a choice of how big the excess is. The greater the excess, the smaller the premium. The smaller the excess, the larger the premium.

This curfew business is just another way of lowering your premium, but the choice is ENTIRELY UP TO YOU.

Everyone whatever their age has a choice to make when taking out a premium. I could have gone for a bigger or smaller excess too, which would affect how much premium I have to pay but would also affect how much I would have to pay towards the excess in the event of an accident.

It's all about insurance companies trying to reduce the risks, and the lower the risks the more likely they will insure you for less. Because as has already been mentioned, insurance companies are there to MAKE MONEY. If you are high risk then they won't make money out of you, and if you reduce your risks then they will.

It's as simple as that...
 
derekmcluckie said:
how come they don't refund young drivers at the end of a claim free year?? They take a hell of a lot of money cause we are more likely to have an accident but don't cough up themselves when we don't. I hate insurance companies :mad:

Del
cos its a business:(, and its a contract argree 2 pay it, i no its crap but, am 21 and my insurance aint that bad, altho u do bring up a good point...hmmmm
 
1986Uno45S said:
They do. They reduce your premium for the next year and give you a no-claims bonus :rolleyes:

Hey that's great they get £1500 off me one year and £1200 the following year because I had no accidents. It's scandelous. Explain this to me I've been driving 3yrs now, drive a 1.2 fiat punto I'm 23 now with 1 yr no claims (was on someone elses policy beforehand) I know someone who is 32 passed test this year after 4 attempts has a focus turbo diesel 1.8 and is fully comp for £600. might i add that im 3rd party fire and theft and my premium is still £450. The people who have the accidents have to be punished you just can't tar everyone with the same brush

Del
 
derekmcluckie said:
Hey that's great they get £1500 off me one year and £1200 the following year because I had no accidents. It's scandelous. Explain this to me I've been driving 3yrs now, drive a 1.2 fiat punto I'm 23 now with 1 yr no claims (was on someone elses policy beforehand) I know someone who is 32 passed test this year after 4 attempts has a focus turbo diesel 1.8 and is fully comp for £600. might i add that im 3rd party fire and theft and my premium is still £450. The people who have the accidents have to be punished you just can't tar everyone with the same brush

Del

You know something? When I first started driving cars and riding motorbikes at 17 I was in exactly the same situation. Many years later with a good driving record and maximum no-claims bonus I can now pay very little for insurance. It's something we ALL have to go through.

It's a legal requirement to have insurance. It's not a legal requirement to provide insurance to someone.

Young people are more likely to have accidents than older people - FACT. Insurance will be higher if you come under a high risk group. You drive well and accumulate a good no-claims bonus then you will pay less than someone of the same age who drives badly and has no no-claims bonus.

ALL insurance premiums are calculated by risk, whether automotive, household or even travel/ health. As I'm getting older I'm finding travel insurance is increasing. Why? Because older people are more likely to claim on travel/ health insurance than younger people.

Welcome to the world of corporate capitalism...
 
Young people are more likely to have accidents than older people - FACT.

...[/quote]

i no this is true but i also hink alot of older ppl can aford to pay the other persons car without telling the insurers(i no not everyone does) but yound ppl can't.... just a wee point
 
(y)
1986Uno45S said:
You know something? When I first started driving cars and riding motorbikes at 17 I was in exactly the same situation. Many years later with a good driving record and maximum no-claims bonus I can now pay very little for insurance. It's something we ALL have to go through.

It's a legal requirement to have insurance. It's not a legal requirement to provide insurance to someone.

Young people are more likely to have accidents than older people - FACT. Insurance will be higher if you come under a high risk group. You drive well and accumulate a good no-claims bonus then you will pay less than someone of the same age who drives badly and has no no-claims bonus.

ALL insurance premiums are calculated by risk, whether automotive, household or even travel/ health. As I'm getting older I'm finding travel insurance is increasing. Why? Because older people are more likely to claim on travel/ health insurance than younger people.

Welcome to the world of corporate capitalism...
nicely put btw
 
jaysenysen said:
Young people are more likely to have accidents than older people - FACT.

...

i no this is true but i also hink alot of older ppl can aford to pay the other persons car without telling the insurers(i no not everyone does) but yound ppl can't.... just a wee point
very few older drivers would do this as they have the NCD in place to be able to take the insurance hit.
i pay £400ish on the turbo fully comp.you think in a bump i would pay for the other car and my car rather than claiming???
 
MATT 68 said:
No! Youre an arse cos your not putting forward an argument in your defence! Wearing a tag is compulsory. Driving isnt!:bang:

How do you expect me to commute 30 miles? Without the car I cannot work. Without work I cannot afford to live. I don't see any choices there.

Why don't I see any support from you for a fairer insurance scheme? Same price cheap insurance for all until you make a mistake. Then you have to prove that you are no longer a danger.
 
1986Uno45S said:
ALL insurance premiums are calculated by risk, whether automotive, household or even travel/ health. As I'm getting older I'm finding travel insurance is increasing. Why? Because older people are more likely to claim on travel/ health insurance than younger people.

Welcome to the world of corporate capitalism...

Travel insurance isn't compulsary though..

Yes I hear you that this is a voluntry scheme. But they're not doing this out the goodness of their hearts. They'll be making more money this way. Once its set up they will start increasing standard insurance until the only insurance young drivers can afford is curfew insurance. Then they can start increasing the premiums on that service too.
 
Hellcat said:
How do you expect me to commute 30 miles? Without the car I cannot work. Without work I cannot afford to live. I don't see any choices there.

Why don't I see any support from you for a fairer insurance scheme? Same price cheap insurance for all until you make a mistake. Then you have to prove that you are no longer a danger.
insurers undewrite risks.they take a premium relating to the risk.
your never going to break that business model as it makes financial sense
 
custard said:
very few older drivers would do this as they have the NCD in place to be able to take the insurance hit.
i pay £400ish on the turbo fully comp.you think in a bump i would pay for the other car and my car rather than claiming???
really depends on the damage, i just saying its been done alot
 
I find it grosely unfair that we are forced to buy a service from a private company. Why is there not insurance offered by the state?

I'm just more than a little p'ssed off that I've paid over four grand in premiums so far, and have very little to show for it. I was not insuring exotic cars by anyones standards. The annual fairground is near our house and the percentage of chavs driving like they are playing GTA is unreal. Was nearly rearended today coming back from a meeting with a potential buyer for the Marea. Not rearended at a set of lights or a junction - no on a perfectly straight 30 road. The :tosser: must have been doing about 50. Why should I have to pay big bucks when I'm nothing like them.

Normal service will hopefully return tomorrow after I've had a decent nights sleep.
 
Hellcat said:
Travel insurance isn't compulsary though..

Yes I hear you that this is a voluntry scheme. But they're not doing this out the goodness of their hearts. They'll be making more money this way. Once its set up they will start increasing standard insurance until the only insurance young drivers can afford is curfew insurance. Then they can start increasing the premiums on that service too.

True, travel/ health insurance isn't compulsory but I was using as an example for where premiums go up as you get older in comparison to cars which normally go down.

Ideally the insurance companies would like no-one to have accidents, so it is in their interest to reduce the likelihood of accidents happening on the road hence the curfew option. We'd still have to have insurance, but because they wouldn't have to pay out so much the premiums would be lower and they'd still make a profit.

However, when people make big claims it affects all of us. Even on FF we've had people bragging about writing cars off and getting a large sum from the insurance. One member was going on about how her brother wrote off a Mitsubishi Evo at something like 19 years old. Accident involved no other drivers so was obviously driver error. End result? BIG payout for the Evo, and because the driver was 19 it just confirmed that young drivers in cars (especially high performance models) are much more likely to have accidents.

The big payout has to be recouped, so EVERYONES insurance premiums go up, especially younger drivers. And the more young drivers that crash, the more insurance for that age group will be high risk.

I do agree that the government should provide some form of minimal insurance cover at a reasonable price for young drivers rather than having them fleeced by private insurance companies. But if that were to happen you can guarantee that young drivers on a scheme like this would be severely restricted to what cars they could be covered for. Expect everone under 21 to be limited 899cc Cinq/ Seis! But hey, they are cool cars so that isn't necessarily a bad thing ;)

It does seem unfair that young drivers have to pay so much, but that's the way it's always been. I had to wait until I was 25 before I could afford to insure a 1.6 litre car, though by the time I was 26 I could afford a 2 litre.

Now I'm rather a few years over 30 (ahem!) I drive a 999cc Uno. It cost me 156 pounds to insure fully comp., and I live just outside London. I have max. no claims, protected no claims, no convictions and a clean driving record (over the last 10 years). I had one claim in about 10 years too, though that was the fault of another driver who drove into me while I was on a roundabout.

So all you young drivers, drive safe, keep a good record and stick to small cars. In only a few years you too will be able to drive bigger and better cars and pay less for doing so (y)

Oh, and insurance companies still suck big time...:mad:
 
personally for me and quite a few people i know this would be useless! quite a few of us have part time jobs in bars and pubs and the car is the only safe way to get home at night without paying huge taxi bills!

i think it should be more flexible and allow for emergencies and working, however enforcing it would be an arse! how they know the difference between a emergency or a cruise?
 
Yea completely useless for me, if it was the other way round then I might benefit! I only drive for leisure purposes mainly, which is usually at night since I work in the day, having a gf who lives 10 miles away and an active (well sort of) social life means I use the car to go out and about at night time.
 
It's like we're convicts or something...being given a tag and monitored where we go! It's ridiculous!...we'll have special lanes soon and special cars that don't go over 30 mph!

I was pulled over by the "undercover police" in the area for simply driving at 2am...ooh, wasn't that suspicious!
Got him back tho...the only thing wrong with my car was my tyre pressures at 29 instead of 30 :p
 
mog1571 said:
How they know the difference between a emergency or a cruise?

Probably from the sat nav tracking the donuts in Maccy D's carpark! :p

Would be a tricky one, especially if they tried to enforce it after a trial. Which I think they would do by increasing the premiums for standard insurance for the under 25s. That could screw the pub and club trade who pretty much rely on under 25s to cut bar staff costs. Kinda silly to complain that students/youngsters won't go out and get part time jobs, then slap restrictions on when they can use their cars.

As for that evo.. it was insured in his mums name so doesn't it go on her insurance?
 
Jai said:
guess we have to switch to plan B, younger drivers have to prove to insurers they are not part of the statistics that prove their age group is most likely to be in a collision

I am quite curious, how is that possible for one person to prove?

I expect insurance to be higher for you inexperienced drivers, but its total bullsh*t how they work it out.

According the Direct Line, after 3 flawless years of driving and 50,000 miles I was still a higher risk than my Friends Mrs who has been driving 2 days and had been to the shops a couple of times (Only just older than me too).

Surely actions speak louder than stats. There is no way she is safer on the roads than me! And even minor incidents, I have parrallel and bay parked more times than I can remember, she has done it about 10 times, who is more likely to hit something

ME! Cos I have a *****! What? Does it hang out the door or something? Pehaps I happy slap wing mirrors with it as I drive by and cause damage that way?

And anothing thing. I got insured on a clapped out 1988 VW polo as my first car. Cost lots, but it didnt have any luxeries. Direct line wouldnt even look at me in a 1.4 with ABS, air bags, servo assisted breaks and all the safety features you could want. As obviously the VW is FAR safer on the road. Although 0-60 was about a second different (cos of weight) and top speed was about 10mph (but then insurance wont cover you if you are speeding so that doesnt matter)

Rant over
 
Back
Top