Speeding

JonMMM

DW Regular +
Joined
Jan 1, 2006
Messages
1,703
Reaction score
376
Don't think you get a post count for posting in general chat, so you are not post counting so no need to delete.

As to middle aged and older drivers causing all the issues, statistics do not agree with you, younger less experienced drivers are far more likely to be in an accident hence why insurance costs so much more
 

IANB

VIP Member
VIP Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2002
Messages
13,332
Reaction score
6,395
Location
somewhere cold
Don't think you get a post count for posting in general chat, so you are not post counting so no need to delete.

As to middle aged and older drivers causing all the issues, statistics do not agree with you, younger less experienced drivers are far more likely to be in an accident hence why insurance costs so much more
They do count in here mate but don't see the need to delete it :)
 

chookey

VIP Member
VIP Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
4,328
Reaction score
2,359
Location
nr.Cov.... pure n*l
I do think traffic management needs to be addressed in this country and laws enforced for these more strictly e.g. middle-lane hoggers, the 40mph club, lane hoggers in the overtaking lanes etc. From my experience it's usually middle-aged drivers and the older generation that cause these frustrations for other drivers. The ones who have taken much more lenient tests, haven't taken theory tests and hazard perception tests and have their own opinions on the highway code.
Exactly. How dare they with their years of driving experience slow down or get in the way of a young inexperienced driver who knows everything.
Bastards
 

ClubLife

Inactive User
Joined
Apr 7, 2016
Messages
7
Reaction score
2
Haha just because you've been doing something longer, doesn't mean you're better at it. In a lot of cases it means you've had much longer to become worse at it/lazy/fall into more bad habits.

I've worked in the motor insurance industry for years, for underwriters. I've started compiling my own research into this over the past 18 months and so far it's extremely interesting. It would appear that the industry have been skewing the stats and only including those drivers who actually claim on their policy for an incident.

When comparing the total number of 18-24y/o's involved in incidents with the total number of 40-55 y/o's involved in incidents, it would appear that the figures are almost exactly the same. The difference is, 8/10 18-24 y/o's are likely to claim on their policy, whereas only 4/10 40-55y/o's are likely to claim on their policy.

Obviously this is only one underwriter but I would be extremely interested to get a hold of every underwriters data to compare, as I simply don't believe the stats!

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
 

JonMMM

DW Regular +
Joined
Jan 1, 2006
Messages
1,703
Reaction score
376
Haha just because you've been doing something longer, doesn't mean you're better at it. In a lot of cases it means you've had much longer to become worse at it/lazy/fall into more bad habits.

I've worked in the motor insurance industry for years, for underwriters. I've started compiling my own research into this over the past 18 months and so far it's extremely interesting. It would appear that the industry have been skewing the stats and only including those drivers who actually claim on their policy for an incident.

When comparing the total number of 18-24y/o's involved in incidents with the total number of 40-55 y/o's involved in incidents, it would appear that the figures are almost exactly the same. The difference is, 8/10 18-24 y/o's are likely to claim on their policy, whereas only 4/10 40-55y/o's are likely to claim on their policy.

Obviously this is only one underwriter but I would be extremely interested to get a hold of every underwriters data to compare, as I simply don't believe the stats!

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
18-24 is 6 years 40-45 is 15 years so 250% more, have your figures taken this into account?
 

ClubLife

Inactive User
Joined
Apr 7, 2016
Messages
7
Reaction score
2
18-24 is 6 years 40-45 is 15 years so 250% more, have your figures taken this into account?
Of course. Funnily enough when I presented the figures to the senior underwriters they informed me they're already aware of them. This is why I don't trust the stats they quote when justifying the increased premiums. To quote my favourite TV show "duking the stats" is a common practice in insurance, be it applying proportionality to a claim, amended premiums due to undisclosed incidents/endorsements etc.

Soon they'll hike premiums up for those without dashcams and black boxes fitted, claiming you're costing the industry more by not having them fitted or some other guilt trip. When in reality it allows them to find all the bad drivers with currently lower premiums and charge them more/quote them out of a policy.

Insurance is a mugs game, they will always find ways to recover any losses/leakage they suffer by charging the customer in the long run. Unfortunately young people are the current scape goats.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
 

trevortron

VIP Member
VIP Member
Premium Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2013
Messages
2,760
Reaction score
3,061
Location
Algarve, Portugal
Interesting reading @ClubLife, but not entirely surprising.
A wise teacher at my school pointed out that the more tickets you buy in a raffle, the more chance you have of losing. Basically, if you took it to the limit and bought all the tickets, you'd be guaranteed to lose, as the organisers are only doing it to make a profit and the 'prize' is worth less than the total ticket sales.
The same applies to insurance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TEST
Top