Mountain Watch

[The Dog's Dangly Bits]

4 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Not on its own. We need a raft of interlocking measures.

Speed may not cause many accidents, it’s mainly poor driving, often combined with speed. But speed exacerbates outcome and seriousness of injury.

A speed limit on its own solves nothing.

Its got to be reasonable, assessed for the road. It’s got to be enforced. Drivers have to be better educated. Vehicles have got to be subject to technical exception.

There’s no need on IoM for any speed over 60, many roads 40, and residential roads 20. With average speed cameras and ANPR. The time difference on most journeys won’t affect anyone.

We should have driver education and awareness testing every licence renewal. 

Im not sure that Government will ever do that. But I suspect that within 10 years our insurers will. You’ll have a black box in your car and premiums will be related to where you drive, how fast, time of day, braking, all sorts.

That's very big brother.

Then only way that ever happens from an insurance perspective is if it becomes law.  You are not going to see insurance companies go it alone because no one will use them.

Driver education seems to be the big one.  

In relation to the Mountain Road - the Mountain Mile seems to be the hot spot but I would hope they never bring in ANPR etc.

[John Wright]

5 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

That's very big brother.

Then only way that ever happens from an insurance perspective is if it becomes law.  You are not going to see insurance companies go it alone because no one will use them.

Driver education seems to be the big one.  

In relation to the Mountain Road - the Mountain Mile seems to be the hot spot but I would hope they never bring in ANPR etc.

Insurers are already doing that with new drivers. At the moment it’s an opt in. The demand for lower premiums, and the need to make those who pose the higher actuarial risk pay, is a relentless drive. It’ll change to opt out.

Refuse a box and your premium will double or triple.

[quilp]

22 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

Do we think a speed limit, of say 60, stops yesterday's accident?

No, but purchasing a moderately fast car for a novice driver 6 months after passing his test may not have been particularly wise.

Should a time-period of restrictions apply for novice drivers?

Aren't bikes restricted for a period after passing?

[The Dog's Dangly Bits]

1 minute ago, John Wright said:

Insurers are already doing that with new drivers. The demand for lower premiums, and the need to make those who pose the higher actuarial risk pay, is a relentless drive.

Has it ever been any different?  I remember having a quick car as an 18 year old and getting my dad to insure it with me as a named driver to get the premiums down

[Non-Believer]

1 minute ago, quilp said:

No, but purchasing a moderately fast car for a novice driver 6 months after passing his test may not have been particularly wise.

Should a time-period of restrictions apply for novice drivers?

Aren't bikes restricted for a period after passing?

We already have R plates. It's not policed and is a mockery.

[The Dog's Dangly Bits]

1 minute ago, quilp said:

No, but purchasing a moderately fast car for a novice driver 6 months after passing his test may not have been particularly wise.

Should a time-period of restrictions apply for novice drivers?

Aren't bikes restricted for a period after passing?

Well novice drivers are restricted to 50mph for a year.

Bikes are not restricted other than the same R plate for 12 months.  You can ride whatever bike you want. 

[John Wright]

3 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

Has it ever been any different?  I remember having a quick car as an 18 year old and getting my dad to insure it with me as a named driver to get the premiums down

Missing the point. As a young driver you can opt in to a box. Reduce your premium by a substantial amount and keep your renewal low by not driving fast, braking hard, or being on the roads in the early hours.

[The Dog's Dangly Bits]

1 minute ago, John Wright said:

Missing the point. As a young driver you can opt in to a box. Reduce your premium by a substantial amount and keep it low by not driving fast, braking hard, or being on the roads in the early hours.

I suspect that will be a very limited market.  The voluntary aspect is an important one.

Any insurance company making thay mandatory is out of business.

[quilp]

3 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

I suspect...

Any insurance company making that mandatory is out of business.

Nah, I suspect this is nonsense. 

[John Wright]

15 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

I suspect that will be a very limited market.  The voluntary aspect is an important one.

Any insurance company making thay mandatory is out of business.

No one mentioned mandatory. Just opt in for lower premiums opt out for higher

[Non-Believer]

13 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

Any insurance company making thay mandatory is out of business.

I suspect definitely not. Compliant and provenly responsible drivers would flock to the possibility of reduced premiums if the company could afford it on the basis of not having to keep making payouts on account of the lunatic fringe.

[The Dog's Dangly Bits]

15 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

I suspect definitely not. Compliant and provenly responsible drivers would flock to the possibility of reduced premiums if the company could afford it on the basis of not having to keep making payouts on account of the lunatic fringe.

I think you over estimate here.

The insurance companies have all the data they need to aim their premiums appropriately.  Algorithms sort all that. At best that sort of thing is a marketing gimmick.

Also, you may have noticed over the last few years that the big change in insurance isn't so much premiums.  It is excesses.   The insurance companies have slowly ramped these up on the quiet.  Firstly it was the introduction of voluntary excesses over and above the standard.  Now the standard mandatory excess has increased.   In some cases up to several hundred pounds.   

 

 

[The Dog's Dangly Bits]

30 minutes ago, quilp said:

Nah, I suspect this is nonsense. 

It sort of isn't though

[TheTeapot]

 

Edited October 18, 2020 by TheTeapot

[pongo]

1 hour ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

I suspect that will be a very limited market.  The voluntary aspect is an important one.

Any insurance company making thay mandatory is out of business.

Speed limiters will soon be fitted by law on all new vehicles.

https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/motoring-news/mandatory-speed-limiters/

It's a staged approach. Starts out voluntary. But, even as they are introduced, you can be certain that removing or disabling them will void your warranty and insurance.

It will be like crash helmets and seat belts. A few weirdos will whine about their personal freedom - or convoluted arguments that regulation makes people less safe. Within a decade we will wonder that we didn't always have them.

And of course there should be a speed limit on the mountain. It's a minor two lane country road which also needs to safely and comfortably accommodate walkers and cyclists.

Edited October 18, 2020 by pongo