Safe Speed Forums

"More Than" Insurance are "offering" young und new drivers a low insurance premium

providing they agree not to drive at night or in the dark

Well .... that limits working hours in winter then

Do these people actually possess a brain cell?

I'd say unworkable - unless you tag these drivers und I am sure no one in right mind would agree to that either.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

why unworkable?

if you drive when not covered you cant claim if you have a crash, thats your risk, plus you risk being done for driving without insurance.

if you get pulled in these hours and get a producer presumeably the insurance certificate will state these restrictions on it too.

its just another option if you're looking to reduce your insurance premium, no one's making you stay in, i'm sure they'd still take your money for a full policy.

This was on the radio this morning.

Apparently they would have to agree to having a gizmo fitted to the car that would record if/when the engine is started and the car moved.
If they drive at night, they are still insured, but get charged £25 for EACH time they drive at night.
I wonder how they would decide what is 'night'? given that in winter it's dark before most people leave work, but in summer is still light at 10pm

The RTA 1988 s.148 says that an insurer cannot avoid third party claims based on the time/location of the vehicle, so a prosecution for driving without insurance would appear to be impossible, but I think the insurer could sue the insured under a contractual clause.

I imagine it is based on official lighting up hours - what I would do is have a display showing the cut-off time.

Now the question - let's assume Johnny Youngman is having fun with his mates and is 10 miles from home. Whoops, he realises he has ten minutes until his "driving curfew". Does he leave his car where it is and get his mum to pick him up or attempt to get home in that time?

Gareth

1. There's no compulsion to join the scheme...yet.
2. Even when I was 18, I was rarely driving after 11pm anyway - it's not like they're telling youngsters to be in by dusk.

Stupid in my opinion. Yes, more accidents do happen at night, but then how do responsible younger drivers build up the experience of driving at night time?

Theres a report about this on the BBC and I noticed this bit:


Back door speed limit enforcement by the insurance company?

I just can't see this as being workable either. I'm sure there would be plenty of drivers trying to adjust their black box so that it left at home at evenings, for example.

Perhaps there should be better education for young drivers about night time driving, or maybe a requirement that a learner has had at least 2/3 lessons in the dark before having full license - instead of this from insurance companies.

Yes but they're talking about 17 to 25's!!!!

Bloody hell when I was 25 i was doing 40k a year, night shifts etc etc etc I simply couldn't do it.

If night time driving is the issue why not extend the scheme to everyone? Obviously the young will benefit the most cos they'll see the biggest cash reduction.

I've heard the scheme is not to ban driving in the dark but its from 11pm-6am.

I don't see any problem with it, after all we all live with restrictions on our policy - no business use, set milage, UK use only, commuting exluded, and the biggest one of all, cover for 3rd party claims only etc.

You decide in advance what restriction your happy with, the more you choose the cheaper the quote, generally. So why not have a restriction so as to when you can use your car? Its not compulsary, you choose if you want it. I maybe wrong but isn't the discount 40%? Off a £2000 policy(not unheard of) thats a very significant £800.

I would think it would be sensible to have mabye 2 or 3 different charges for night driving, to avoid the realistic scenario g_atrill raised of a youngster trying to 'beat the clock'. You could maybe have a charge of £12.50 if used between 11am-1am with the other £12.50 if still in use between 1am-6am. Or £25 if used entirely between 1am - 6am.

It sounds fine to me though provided it's maintained as a choice for a reductions in premiums.

the problem isn't night time driving as such. The problem is that youngsters, being youngsters, go out partying and then drive home, not necessarily sober, and attempt to impress their mates on the way.
Maybe a better option would be to remove the right to carry passengers (even just those under a certain age) after dark.

This topic is also being discussed here: http://www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8555

I'm going to close the OTHER topic and move this one to 'Road Safety Speed Camera and Policy news'

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

One problem with all such schemes is that it's not the VEHICLE that needs insurance, it's the DRIVER.

So big brother can't drive Johnny 17 home on his own (BBs) insurance without the car ratting and assuming a different driver?

That's just great isn't it?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Very important question!

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

25 quid for driving at night?

25 quid would pay a back street auto electrician to add a switch that disables the device, of course if they get into a crash they're screwed, and they need to return the car to the same point it was previously parked before re-enabling the device.

Another 25 quid gets the device put back to standard, just make sure to get this done before the assessors are sent out, then plead ignorance.

You can't fit it without a fuse and if you pull the fuse it has no power and cannot talk to anything.

I suppose there could be a local backup battery, but it'll soon go flat (if it's capable of supporting a transmitter) when the fuse is pulled.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

It could transmit details of one journey with the fuse pulled, this would be sufficient to invalidate your policy I guess.

I can see small faraday cages becoming stock items at the more dubious auto electrical shops.

... and tin foil hats for aerials.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

I would be inclinded to say that this will result in more people driving uninsured, but it probably wont.

a) The third party is still allowed to make a claim, I don't care what happens to the driver who chooses to do this.

b) Chances are the majority of the people doing this wont be insured properly anyway as they'll have undeclared modifications like spoilers, tints, alloys, cut/lowered springs or blue LED crappy windscreen washers.

All it means is they'll pay lower premiums, the insurance will still have to pay out and everyone's insurance will go up.

How about a slightly softer approach that doesn't need a device. Have an increased excess for crashes in the curfew hours, say an extra 500 quid on top of the standard access. No need for privacy invading devices and the cost is enough to put you off or make you think about driving a bit more carefully.

Only problem then is if the other driver is co-operative, they may lie about the time of the colission, especially since the police don't attend most car accidents these days.

To be fair, 'More Than' offering a 40% discount will probably bring their premiums down to the market rate....

By the time Wildy had simmered down from hearing this over her morning saucer of milk - she'd posted up on PH. This report suggested a 40% drop in premiums but a surcharge of £25 for each occasion they drive between 11pm and 6 am.

They also say they will monitor via a black box.

Now we have a family problem with this - should we or our kids insure with this company. (Not that it matters to us - I pay for William to drive our family cars as named driver on our policies. Fortunately our boy is a chip off the old blocks as he has acquired a RoSPA gold standard to match ours! I must and to my son.. I also have the twins named as learners to practise in William's cart as well as all of ours including the classics. They need a wide experience to develop handling skills in any situation. I will say I am more than pleased with them - especially since Steffi had a scare with a cycling red light jumper in her first week of learning. I am told she stopped the car in an emeergency situation with no slide or uncomfortable jerk. I am well relieved and pleased about that. I think she will develop as one very safe driver as a result of this.)

But back to our particular problem. I will reminisce to my own student days.

1. In one summer vacation - I secured a job at a newspaper. My job was to load the morning papers onto the vans heading for WH Smith etc as distributors. This was NIGHT SHIFT! I was driving in the "taboo hours" to get to my holiday job.

2. As a medical student and junior doctor - I had to serve my time in A&E for a hard, pressurised learning stint. This was shift work. I was under age 25 at the time. I had to drive in these taboo hours.

My son, William, is a medical student. He will have the same sort of training in a couple of years whether he chooses Dundee or Manchester for his clinicals. (He's at St Andrews... we did three years (four if selected for honours as I was and he looks like he will be, as well, based on his results - works out expensive for us though - one more year of tuition fees and allowances for him. We are keeping his loan to minimum - far from urban myth - "juniors" do not earn that much at the start )


However, this would mean that students like William and let's face it - there are no buses at those hours.. - will be hit by a further expense just because they are studying medicine. The same would apply to those on nursing degree practicals and young nurses too.

Oh sure - he can ride a bike - but then his digs may be a distance off. You are not necessarily placed next door nor do you always get a room in the hospital itself these days. You do as junior sometimes (and depends on the job and contract terms - quite rare these days though) - but not necessarily as student


3. My son William also found a job as a shift worker for the summer. He works in the ice cream makers - sometimes on the ice cream van dependent on his shift - and Nick has a job in a tourist shop selling ice creams as well. But my eldest has a job like mine in my own student days where he may be on the road during this excess charge period.

4. Both Wildy and self are named drivers on William's own policy (which I pay as he's a student at the moment.) I did this so that he could get a driving history for insurance purposes. He gets a very slight discount for taking the trouble to learn a bit more. Not much .. but it adds up. So .. as adults under this system - we could end up paying £25 because a "black box says this car was on the road in the small hours"

5. Our policy also says in the small print that we can drive any car on a third party insurance basis. OK - so neighbour's 21 year old kid has a family emergency and our cars are off the road. He's too agitated to drive .. so we dirve his car with him as a passenger. He's inusred under this sytem. How the hell can he prove he did nopt break these rules.

I think this is why Wildy thinks this sytem may not work too well after all

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

I read about this earlier and then put it to my son. His eyes opened wide with astonishment that anyone could dream up something so ridiculous. He said about all the things that Mad Moggie has said and that the £25 a time would make it unrealistic in terms of savings on premiums.

He pondered it a bit more and thought of a way round it - he would use my car instead!

I found some years ago at the time when I was insured with Royal & Sun Alliance (I think that's who it was) and More Than took them over/merged/changed name or whatever happened, that their premiums went up quite dramatically. When it came to renewal, I shopped around and changed. When asked why by More Than, I told them straight "it's because since you've had the name More Than, you've lived up to it - your quotes are More Than everyone else's" I've found that it still applies.

Based on that, I doubt the 'savings' to be had in that scheme would be so great realistically.