Bluesman

Just How Much Longer Are We Going To Allow Insurance Companies To Stea

Recommended Posts

Read this..............................

Think again before you use your phone whilst driving. Not only will you get three points on your licence and a £60 fine, but you can also expect to see the cost of your car insurance shoot up.

Anyone caught talking or fiddling with a handheld mobile phone - be it texting, playing games, surfing the web or reading emails - now faces an increase of up to 60% in their car insurance premium - worse than for a speeding offence.

The AA found that insurers in every case took a mobile phone misuse more seriously than speeding, although two speeding offences were regarded as more serious than a single mobile phone offence.

A Moneysupermarket survey, conducted for the Daily Telegraph, confirmed the crackdown. It revealed that drivers aged 40 and above will see their car insurance premium go up by 10% for a three-point speeding offence. Those in their 30s can expect an average 15% hike while drivers in their 20s are worst hit with an average increase of 22%. Those convicted of mobile phone offences can expect their premiums to rise by up to 60% - some insurers even refuse to give a quote.

I agree that if you are caught using mobiles or playing a game of snooker while you are driving then you should be punished. But why do we then allow a Private company to come along after HM courts who are the only law in this country, have fined and given you points on your licence to all intense and purposes fine you again with vastly inflated premiums not just for one year but for as long as they feel we should subsidise their champagne lifestyle?

ROLL ON THE REVOLUTION

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Basically it's all about risk.

Anyone who drives using a mobile and is caught is clearly a higher risk driver than someone who does not use a mobile.

(and in my view a danger to society).

So a premium increase in justified: I object to subsidising dangerous drivers who are more risky than me as a result of deliberately breaking the law

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Basically it's all about risk. Anyone who drives using a mobile and is caught is clearly a higher risk driver than someone who does not use a mobile. (and in my view a danger to society). So a premium increase in justified: I object to subsidising dangerous drivers who are more risky than me as a result of deliberately breaking the law

I am in total agreement with punishing these wrong doers but why do we bother with courts. Just hand over the entire courts system to private companies because they will weed far more money out of you than a court ever will.

As for you and me being charged extra for other peoples short comings you have started to believe the government & corporate propaganda.

These companies are making a massive fortunes even with these people who cause death and mayhem by messing around with equipment in cars.

A lot of this could be avoided if we taught people to drive in the first place and not just to pass a test.

How much longer do we allow a 17 year old person who has just passed their test to immediately get onto motorways without any instruction what so ever.

I don't ever see insurance companies lobbying parliament to get this as part of the test together with other anomalies that are part of our useless driving test, and why because they are making fortunes out of a useless system.

Now I am gonna have my dinner.

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read this..............................

Think again before you use your phone whilst driving. Not only will you get three points on your licence and a £60 fine, but you can also expect to see the cost of your car insurance shoot up.

I agree that if you are caught using mobiles or playing a game of snooker while you are driving then you should be punished. But why do we then allow a Private company to come along after HM courts who are the only law in this country, have fined and given you points on your licence to all intense and purposes fine you again with vastly inflated premiums not just for one year but for as long as they feel we should subsidise their champagne lifestyle?

ROLL ON THE REVOLUTION

Mike

No-one likes to see their insurance premiums rise but, with all due respect, I just cannot see the basis for your post! The "private company" are the risk assessors/risk takers and any convictions affect premiums and have done for as many years as I have been driving (45 years) The Government decide the laws, the courts try to punish people who are found guilty, and then, quite rightly, the "private companies" recalculate the risk which they are taking by agreeing to provide cover to motorists who, by using mobile devices whilst driving, have shown themselves to be somewhat irresponsible and clearly a higher risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of this could be avoided if we taught people to drive in the first place and not just to pass a test.

How much longer do we allow a 17 year old person who has just passed their test to immediately get onto motorways without any instruction what so ever.

Mike

Again Mike, I really can't see the relevance of the above to your original post regarding the use of mobile devices whilst driving! With the vast array of inexpensive handsfree equipment which is available for mobile phones there really is NO excuse for breaking the law regarding the use of these whilst driving.......and the resulting insurance premium increase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a absolute joke, insurance companies are getting like banks they think they have the rule of the land over you,The paying motorist.

Bombard the AA, RAC and omdbusman.your money your choice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I read Mike's post correctly I feel what is being said is that the insurance companies jump on ANY excuse to screw us over.

We are easy targets.

I agree that all those bozos who use a mobile or shave or do their make up should have the book thrown at them. Ban them for 3 years as I suspect they are way more dangerous than your average drink driver simply due to the sheer numbers doing it!

A lady ( I use the term loosely ) using a mobile mounted the kerb round the corner from where I live and very nearly wiped out two generations of a family. As it was she killed the mother and very badly injured the father. That family were cycling on the cycle lane 20 feet! From the road! Halfwits like this should be up in court for man slaughter in my opinion.

But lets just get one thing perfectly clear, in my opinion and I'm sure I'm right, the insurance companies don't give two s**ts about any human costs of the actions of these idiots but they sure know how to use it to jack premiums up.

I'm sick and tired of people sticking up for insurance companies but I absolutely stand by their right to believe the twaddle these companies peddle in the pursuit of greed. I just believe they are wrong.

I know where you are coming from Mike, there needs to be better training and harsher consequences, then maybe these people might just spend £10 to buy an ear piece and maybe save a life.

Sorry about the rant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we really need ANOTHER insurance thread?

Yes insurance companies will use any excuse to drive up the price of a premium. That's probably because any of those excuses have demonstrated a lack of judgement by the driver, and therefore makes you a higher risk, and a more likely candidate for the insurer to have to pay out against.

Want to know the MAIN reason insurers use any excuse to put your premium up? It's because they are losing money hand over fist to the anbulance chasing vulture 'No Win, No Fee' solicitors that plague the media these days. It seems like every other advertisement on tv, radio or in a newpaper is about "Have you had an accident that wasn't your fault? Then call Schyster, Scammer, and FastOne now".

Ooh, sat down a bit too hard and tweaked your neck at work? Obviously your employers fault for providing chairs that are too hard. Sue them!

It makes me sick, no-one has any responsibility for their own actions anymore, and are always looking for a way to blame someone else and make a quick buck in the process.

It's **** tiring...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree about taking responsibility.

I recently tripped outside a shop, it was no ones fault but mine. I wasn't watching where I was going.

I get at least two calls a week from companies telling me I can claim back my ppi and they are absolutely gob smacked when I say I've had reason to use ppi for a period last year and therefore I don't feel its morally right for me to want my money back! Yet they try and persuade me to go ahead anyway.

The moral compass of this country has gone to hell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of this could be avoided if we taught people to drive in the first place and not just to pass a test.

How much longer do we allow a 17 year old person who has just passed their test to immediately get onto motorways without any instruction what so ever.

I don't ever see insurance companies lobbying parliament to get this as part of the test together with other anomalies that are part of our useless driving test, and why because they are making fortunes out of a useless system.

Now I am gonna have my dinner.

Mike

Both of my children did the 'Pass Plus' after passing their driving test. This certified them as having extra tuition in night and motorway driving which resulted in lower insurance premiums which immediately paid for the cost of the 'Pass Plus'. It isn't the responsibility of the Insurance Companies to lobby Parliament to get m-way driving included in the standard test, but they do recognise the lower risk when individuals make it their responsibility to achieve highr driving standards. The IAM qualification is yet another example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of this could be avoided if we taught people to drive in the first place and not just to pass a test.

How much longer do we allow a 17 year old person who has just passed their test to immediately get onto motorways without any instruction what so ever.

Mike

Again Mike, I really can't see the relevance of the above to your original post regarding the use of mobile devices whilst driving! With the vast array of inexpensive handsfree equipment which is available for mobile phones there really is NO excuse for breaking the law regarding the use of these whilst driving.......and the resulting insurance premium increase.

I must apologies for not making my point clearer, abs is coming from my general direction.

We commit offenses and the consequence is that if caught we are imprisoned, fined, license endorsed etc. I don't have a problem with that and the harsher the penalties the better. Most of those handed down are a joke especially on some of the more serious offenses. Death by dangerous driving etc. If convicted of anything like that in my opinion you should be imprisoned minimum 10 years and banned from driving for life. There can be no excuses for this type of offense.

In any of these examples there is no profit element.

When convicted of lessor offenses we fine, endorse maybe a short period banning them from driving then we allow a private company which is purely driven by profit and nothing else to then to all intense and purpose fine them again for as long as they want without any good to the public purse.

Just because insurance companies have done this forever doesn't make it right especially as the only thing to come out of it is bigger profits.

Insurance companies have bleated on from time immemorial about how much this group is a risk and that but it hasn't stopped shed loads of companies from getting in on the act, and all making nice big fat profits. How many insurance companies have you heard in the last 5 years going bust.

There are over 62 million people who live in this country and further from popular belief only a very small minute number of people cause grief, what ever form it takes.

The practice of charging people further over and above the courts is why I have always argued that if something is required by law Road Tax etc then it should be the government that runs and provides it with all profits if any helping out the public purse.

One very hot subject are clampers who are no better than demanding monies with menaces.

What is the difference between the two.

If you don't pay up the extortionate amount the clampers want you don't drive your car and if you cant pay the extortionate amount the insurance company want you dont get to drive your car.

Now I'm gonna take a lie down in a darkened room with a couple of Valium.

We have to have a serious look in this country on how things are done and sooner rather than later.

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of this could be avoided if we taught people to drive in the first place and not just to pass a test.

How much longer do we allow a 17 year old person who has just passed their test to immediately get onto motorways without any instruction what so ever.

I don't ever see insurance companies lobbying parliament to get this as part of the test together with other anomalies that are part of our useless driving test, and why because they are making fortunes out of a useless system.

Now I am gonna have my dinner.

Mike

Both of my children did the 'Pass Plus' after passing their driving test. This certified them as having extra tuition in night and motorway driving which resulted in lower insurance premiums which immediately paid for the cost of the 'Pass Plus'. It isn't the responsibility of the Insurance Companies to lobby Parliament to get m-way driving included in the standard test, but they do recognise the lower risk when individuals make it their responsibility to achieve highr driving standards. The IAM qualification is yet another example.

Well done you, I did the same for my two but it shouldn't have been a voluntary thing it needs to be mandatory.

It didn't stop my son from wrecking his first two cars.

How much did that cost the insurance companies? Not a penny and they made a bundle because for 6 months although he wasn't driving they kept the premiums and had nothing at risk. To save him from even higher premiums we took the hit.

I know its not the insurance companies job to lobby parliament but then if they try and justify higher premiums not just because they think that driver will crash quicker than you but on moralistic grounds then they should be.

Mike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow quite a hornets nest blown up here!!

I'm afraid I have no sympathy whatsoever with people who get caught for using mobile phones, subsequently get fined and then have their insurance premiums hiked up. As a biker, I dread meeting these idiots when I'm out. They have no true conscious awareness of anything that is going on around them. The result is very often a loud crash, a bike and rider all over the road blood everywhere and a complete pillock saying "where did you come from? I never saw you"

Quite frankly if you don't like the insurance company increases, don't be stupid and don't use your phone while driving. It's really not rocket science! At the end of the day you will be doing the world and yourself a favour.

Rant over

Tc

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow quite a hornets nest blown up here!!

I'm afraid I have no sympathy whatsoever with people who get caught for using mobile phones, subsequently get fined and then have their insurance premiums hiked up. As a biker, I dread meeting these idiots when I'm out. They have no true conscious awareness of anything that is going on around them. The result is very often a loud crash, a bike and rider all over the road blood everywhere and a complete pillock saying "where did you come from? I never saw you"

Quite frankly if you don't like the insurance company increases, don't be stupid and don't use your phone while driving. It's really not rocket science! At the end of the day you will be doing the world and yourself a favour.

Rant over

Tc

I wont write what I think of motorcyclists as it would probably get pulled.

You miss the point of the whole argument.

I have nothing against you or anyone else which includes me from being nicked if they are caught breaking the law and the penalties should be harsh a lot harsher than they are today.

What I am against is then going on to be further penalized by a private company that tries to say the extra is because you will crash quicker than me and cost us more, all they are safeguarding are their huge profits that they are already making nothing else not to help you of the public or anything else PURELY PROFIT.

By the way I have never been caught for any motoring offence, my license is clean.

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By your argument we should all be paying exactly the same for insurance. In that case I have to tell you I'd be delighted to pay the same as someone running around in a Micra.

And yes I'm one of the tattooed crowd that go hurtling past you on a weekend. got to love it!!

Tc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By your argument we should all be paying exactly the same for insurance. In that case I have to tell you I'd be delighted to pay the same as someone running around in a Micra.

And yes I'm one of the tattooed crowd that go hurtling past you on a weekend. got to love it!!

Tc

Theres nothing else to say.

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.