Speed awareness course...upping insurance?

[spursmaddave]

I done a speed awareness corse when caught speeding in my MG before i stepped into the light of Zed's.

 

What a waste of a day, some old guy driving a astra preaching at me, didn't know first thing about a car or what they can do.

 

I's rather take the points, actually maybe not but the corse is like capital punishment

 

I think just maybe you completely missed the whole point of the course

[Chesterfield]

Insurers raising premiums for drivers attending speed awareness courses, negates the entire point of the course from an insurance view.

 

The key difference between a driver that takes points between drivers that attends a course is that the driver attending the course should in theory be LESS likely to speed in the future. After all that is the aim of the course from the police's view.

 

If insurance companies are treating these two people the same, they are effectively saying the courses are useless and ineffective. A bit of a kick in the teeth for all safety camera partnerships etc.

 

Lets look at it this way...

 

If all insurance companies did this, how many people would bother paying more money to attend a course for several hours instead of just taking the points and £60 fine? Probably none.

 

Therefore nobody will be better educated on speed, and the fines and subsequent points only become a deterrent to those who can't easily afford premium increases.

[rtbiscuit]

I done a speed awareness corse when caught speeding in my MG before i stepped into the light of Zed's.

 

What a waste of a day, some old guy driving a astra preaching at me, didn't know first thing about a car or what they can do.

 

I's rather take the points, actually maybe not but the corse is like capital punishment

 

its not about maximising your speed on the road, its designed to slow you down, its meant to be a punishment becuase you broke the law.

 

he's not there to tell you how to make the best traffic light grandprix start.

[Ekona]

I'm still waiting for a response from the FO.

[4RE Leather]

Part of the department of transports campaing for safer roads and part of the BETEC course is that all PCV and LGV have to go on and soon everything above 3.5 tonnes is a days speed awareness, and putting theory into practice.

I know this as I am a registered Transport for london BTEC examiner.

So how would this go against there insurance premiums?

If, as at least one person states you have to answer correctly.

So the answer to the question being "have you been on a speed awareness course!" Commands the yes answer.

It's a black and white question that needs a black and white answer!! Not "Butt"

I would like to hear back from any on the insurance brokers on here please!

Edited November 19, 2012 by 4RE Leather

[JetSet]

. Unless they have some ability to check police databases which is unlikely.

 

 

 

They can't access the police database, which includes personal details held by The DVLA and in any case I'm not sure that the DVLA will keep records of non convictions, obviously the police will though. Insurance companies have their own database which the police have access to for when they do roadside stops, etc. This database will also cover your insurance history and any other information (like declared convictions). When I changed over to Admiral they didn't ask me for proof of no claims so they probably checked it out on their database.

 

http://www.inbrief.co.uk/police/police-national-computer.htm

 

 

"There are several organisations with full access to the PNC including all territorial police forces of Great Britain, the Police Service of Northern Ireland, British Transport Police, Civil Nuclear Constabulary, Isle of Man Constabulary, States of Jersey Police, States of Guernsey Police Service, Serious Organised Crime Agency, Ministry of Defence Police, HM Revenue & Customs, The Security Service MI5, Secret Intelligence Service MI6, Government Communication Headquarters, Defence Intelligence Staff, Department for Work and Pensions, Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency and the Association of Chief Police Officers.

There are a number of other organisations with restricted access. These include HM Court Service where Crown Courts use the PNC juror link to carry out criminal record checks on potential jury members. The Criminal Records Bureau use the PNC to carry out criminal record checks on individuals applying to work with children or other vulnerable people although concerns have been expressed that the indefinite retention of old convictions and cautions is unwarranted. Other organisations with restricted access include the Probation Service, the Royal Military Police, Royal Air Force Police, Royal Navy Police and Royal Marines Police."

Pete

[S1an1de]

Isnt this, in part, covered under the Rehabilitation of offenders Act?

 

"Applying for Insurance

 

You may say that you do not have any previous convictions on an application form for an insurance policy as long as the rehabilitation period has ended and the convictions are spent. This still applies even if the convictions are relevant to the insurance policy being taken out – you do not have to disclose spent road traffic convictions when applying for car insurance, for example."

 

Now seeing as there is actually no conviction for any crime at all as you are offered the "course" instead of the conviction, providing certain criteria are met are the insurance companies now not running the high risk of getting their collective asses kicked again for discrimination, as there no way they can force an answer to the question and it is your right whether you chose to answer it or not?

 

Secondly what is a speed awareness course? .. the whole question is ambiguous. I may have attended a course for speed awareness as part of my employment [ say for example i work for drivetech], i may have attended one of a thousand advanced driver days and one of these may have related to speed and the the appropriate us of said speed...do the insurance companies expect me to answer "Yes" to this?

[Ekona]

Exactly why I'm still waiting for a response from the FO.

[rabbitstew]

"Our claims statistics show that drivers who have committed a speeding offence could be a higher risk than drivers who do not commit speeding offences."

 

Once again, the insurance companies jack up their prices for their perceived increased risk, but they seldom consider reducing their premiums for things which lower risks.....

[ilogikal1]

The bit that bothers me about the quote from Admiral's spokes person is;

 

Our claims statistics show that drivers who have committed a speeding offence could be a higher risk than drivers who do not commit speeding offences.

This means that people attending a speed awareness course are more likely to make a claim...

 

The difference between could and are is a fairly major leap to make. Especially when, as previously alluded to, attendees of speed awareness courses are statistically less likely to speed again than those who don't.

[Ekona]

attendees of speed awareness courses are statistically less likely to speed again than those who don't.

Do we have figures for this? Would be nice to have, certainly could do well to back up a claim.

[was8v]

I think insurers have got this upside down.

 

I went to an SAC and could see that it really opened a few people's eyes. I heard some people come out with crazy things - at the course everyone was put right and given coping strategies. I came away having learnt something "new" and I think most people did - they will be more attentive at least on the drive home....

 

The opportunity to re-educate drivers in modern conditions should be maximised by the government.

 

Of course, if there is research that shows those who have SAC's are more likely to claim or reoffend, in which case there's little to argue for them and insurers will load premiums.

Edited November 19, 2012 by was8v

[rabbitstew]

My missus did the speed awareness course the other year and she enjoyed it - it taught her so much more about the roads, speed limits, safety etc. etc.

[Chesterfield]

attendees of speed awareness courses are statistically less likely to speed again than those who don't.

Do we have figures for this? Would be nice to have, certainly could do well to back up a claim.

 

Second to last paragraph from North Yorkshire Police:

 

http://www.northyorkshire.police.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4193

 

This was one of many articles that can be found with a few minutes of using google, which show that drivers who attend speed awareness courses are LESS likely to reoffend in future than those who have points. Meaning Admiral are completely ignoring this research from the police.

 

I have one car left in our house insured with Admiral, expires December - will not be renewing with them on principal due to this policy of theirs.

[rtbiscuit]

my policy with them runs out next year, and from seeing others renewals i may well be going else where as well. shame as i've been with them for the last 6 years. always shop around, after their first crap offer, give them my best offer and then they usually match it.

[ilogikal1]

attendees of speed awareness courses are statistically less likely to speed again than those who don't.

Do we have figures for this? Would be nice to have, certainly could do well to back up a claim.

 

Not got a link to hand but Humberside Police claim (from memory) that one in four who don't attend a course re-offend within three years compared to one in twelve from those who do.

 

North Lincs say, here;

The re-offending rate after attending the course is substantially less than the expected re-offending rate after prosecution alone

 

The rest of Lincs says, here;

For example a high proportion of drivers who have points on their licence re-offend again within a year or two, compared to less than 1% who re-offend after 3 years having attended a speed workshop

 

And Chief Inspector Darren Downs of the Roads Policing Section is quoted, here, as stating;

We know that approximately 80 per cent of people who attend these courses never reoffend.

 

There's plenty more to be found via Google as Chesterfield stated too.

 

 

As chance would have it, my insurance (currently with Admiral) is due for renewal. I will not be renewing with Admiral though regardless of their best quote.

Edited November 19, 2012 by ilogikal1

[jhutch]

I think people might of miss understood my original post,

 

What i meant about no know what cars can do, he had a go at me for putting the car in 5 gear from 4 gear, i told him it was to conserve full as 5 gear would dull the rev therefore the engine would use less fuel.

 

He said this was completly wrong and the ECU would know how much fuel the car would need and should stay in fourth.

 

As for the course slowing me down, yes it has a little and i haven't been done for speeding since.

 

Hopefull I might be better understood this time.

[Ekona]

He's wrong. A car will always use less fuel in a higher gear at a given speed, that much is common sense. What will alter is that you won't be able to react as quick in the higher gear, but that's another debate on road prep entirely.

 

Why would a car doing 60mph at 2k revs in 5th use more fuel than the same car at the same speed doing 3k revs?! Crazy. More revolutions = more throttle = more fuel.

[jhutch]

This was my arguemeet, he though he knew best and me being 40 years younger was wrong.

 

That’s a driver instructor as well who knew nothing about how a car actually works as long as you have 2 hands on the steering wheel and drive like Miss Daisy everything’s fine. Just his fuel consuption is worse then a Z

[cs2000]

I have just changed my insurance over to the Zed yesterday and for the first time ever i was asked if i had attended any "Police Driver Training Courses" I was caught using my mobile phone abour 3 years ago but luckilly got offered the course which i obviously took.

 

I know they asked me a direct question which i lied too in response as i said no, but i also know the law and that the course acts as a kind-of pardon whereby your offences are forgiven so to speak, so you're under no legal requirement to tell them and they will only jack up your premium if you did.

[Ekona]

You should've told them. If they'd have increased the price because of this then you'd have had them over a barrel, but because you lied to them it's now on you.

 

Also, admitting to lying to an insurance company on a public forum might not be the greatest idea in the world :wink:

[rabbitstew]

Hang on... a "Police Driver Training Course" is not the same as the speed awareness course. I thought the police driver training course was what traffic cops do to teach them how to drive at 140mph in unmarked police cars for fun?

[Ekona]

I doubt they send you on one of those if you're caught on your phone, so I assume it was a fancy name for a SAC.

[cs2000]

Yeah thats what i meant, its just what they said to me it was called.

 

None of my real details are on the forum so it doesnt really matter what i say about it. it could however just have been purely for a record, as in, it wouldnt increse my premiums, they just want to know.

 

Regardless, that policy expires in a few days anyway, i just switched so i could drive the zed home tonight and i was also told on the course that you do not need to declare that yopu have been on one of the courses.

 

Id like to see them take any action on me with regards to it and actually succeed.

[rabbitstew]

I doubt they send you on one of those if you're caught on your phone, so I assume it was a fancy name for a SAC.

 

Either that or they meant had the person been on some sort of advanced driving course which may reduce their insurance!