Car Insurance For Youngsters....HELP

[Imurg]

A an Instructor I see these kids who think they can drive within 5 minutes of sitting in the car. With most of them there is a huge sense of inevitability. No matter how well I teach them, no matter how good and sensible they are on their test, I know damn well that as soon as they have their licence they'll be off, forgetting most of what they've been taught and taking risks that experienced drivers don't take because they're - well experienced!
As far as I'm aware only 1 of my "flock" have had their licence revoked in the first 2 years after test but a large percentage have wrecked cars.
I was waiting outside a school the other day for a client and I saw 2 cars racing to get to the gates first - idiots I thought. As they sped past I noticed they were 2 kids I'd got through their tests within the last month.
I just thought "Why do I bother?"
Until general attitudes change in this Country there will be no change in the behaviour of drivers - all of us. The kids see Mum or Dad cutting a roundabout, a taxi driver not signalling or another kid speeding and they start to think it's ok for them to do it. And so the cycle continues.

 

[Parmo]

Retake your test after 10 years for everyone.

We can't make the tests any harder, it is one of the hardest in the world now.

Maybe have pre 1999 people retake their tests under the stricter rules.

 

[Imurg]

They have a perfect chance.
The photocard card licence needs to be renewed every 10 years. Most of us have them now. After 9 1/2 years you get sent a form. YOu take it to a Test Centre or Driving Instructor or whatever, you get assessed and if you're deemed competent you get your form signed and you can renew your licence.
But it wont happen. Even the Chief Exec. of the DSA said as much when I challenged her on it 3 years ago. Too much money.
Oh and she said it would impact on too many lives if licences were not renewed - so what? If you're not good enough you shouldn't be on the road.

These kids passing now could be driving in 2063, never having been assessed again and never having to keep up with changes. Can't be right can it?

 

[chrisd]

They have a perfect chance.
YOu take it to a Test Centre or Driving Instructor or whatever, you get assessed and if you're deemed competent you get your form signed and you can renew your licence.

But surely if they can get through todays test ok and be allowed to drive, after 10 years actually getting through another test would be a piece of cake - it's how they drive day to day is the problem. Any (say) under 25 year old having an accident should perhaps be required to do a safety test prior to being able to insure their car and drive again.



Chris

 

[Imurg]

If every driver took a test tomorrow 85-90% would fail. Not necessarily on car control but mainly on observation, speeding, road position and use of signals.
We pick up bad habits, most of the time it's not an issue but in a test they would be.

 

[CliveW]

Retake your test after 10 years for everyone.

We can't make the tests any harder, it is one of the hardest in the world now.

Maybe have pre 1999 people retake their tests under the stricter rules.

That won't solve the problem of youngsters driving foolishly.
In my opinion the driving test is dafter than ever especially since the beginning of last month. There is now a section where all you do is follow direction signs for 10 minutes and there is only one compulsory manouvre in the test.
With regard to setting curfews, what happens to drivers who have recently passed their test who work shifts? Also the argument about restricting engine size is a no go either as most teenagers borrow their parent's cars which tend to be more powerful. Smaller engines too are more powerful nowadays so a car of say 1,000cc can be extremely fast.
In my opinion, youngsters don't have any sense of danger or the consequences of their actions. They play computer games where they conststantly crash cars and all they need to do if they crash is hit the reset button. If only real life was like that!
Another point worth considering is the construction of present day cars. They are now more complex than of old as well as safer. This gives drivers a sense of security and therefore drivers take more risks. Accident damaged cars are less likely to be repaired and are written off more than of old so repairs are more costly and therefore this is reflected in insurance premiums.

 

[chrisd]

If every driver took a test tomorrow 85-90% would fail. Not necessarily on car control but mainly on observation, speeding, road position and use of signals.
We pick up bad habits, most of the time it's not an issue but in a test they would be.

For sure we would fail if we had to drive the robotic way we did to get through the test (for me in 1971) but we would, most of us, pass if it was a case of being safe drivers - it is still the new drivers who have and cause a high percentage of accidents ... along with, real old gits, foreigners who probably never took a test, and here in mid kent, the lorry drivers from the eastern bloc countries who side swipe people on a regular basis


Chris

 

[USER1999]

Why should someone who is say, 50, who has never had an accident have to re-take a test? Surely the fact of never having an accident speaks for itself, they are a safe driver.

 

[Robobum]

Why should someone who is say, 50, who has never had an accident have to re-take a test? Surely the fact of never having an accident speaks for itself, they are a safe driver.

They may have caused hundreds though Murph. Seen them all in their rear view as cars swerve to avoid their sh!te driving.

 

[USER1999]

Takes two to have an accident though, so if the ones crashing were any good, they could have avoided it.

 

[19th]

Why should someone who is say, 50, who has never had an accident have to re-take a test? Surely the fact of never having an accident speaks for itself, they are a safe driver.

Lets accept that insurers do not rate premiums looking in their rear view mirror(!)

£2000 premium for a new driver, £200 for me - now this makes sense - I am not, in their opinion, going to have a claim. Using claim stats they are well aware of the 'problem puppies' and charge accordingly and they also underwrite the problem areas in their premium BUT it is all done with acturial input even down to the prospective investment return of the premium over the year.

Considering the foregoing, calling for older people to resit a test is statistically stupid and normally requested by the 'boy racers' of whatever age who find driving at 30 in a 30 zone boring!

 

[Macster]

I'm not going to enter the debate about driving standards, but whatever you do, DONT take out a policy in your name with your child as a 'named' driver on their own car.
It's well known in the Ins industry, and it's called Fronting, and is illegal.
Sure, you might think you have got away with it, but if there is an accident, you risk them not being covered at all, which if they are 'at fault', could prove VERY expensive for you/them.

It may have worsened, but my own daughters first policy was circa £800 on a little micra 3yrs ago.
Sons are a different matter entirely, as not without good reason, boys are simply more likely statistically to drive faster.

 

[JustOne]

As far as I'm aware only 1 of my "flock" have had their licence revoked in the first 2 years after test but a large percentage have wrecked cars.

I blame the instructors, seriously

People don't get the chance to chuck a car around with a driving instructor, they just potter around at 30mph, so the moment they have the chance out by themselves they will take the opportunity to experiment somewhat.

Some years ago I took a friend out to a VERY BIG empty carpark one evening when he was learning to drive and I had him throw the car around like a scene out of 'The Italian Job', had him parking in empty spaces, going from 1st to 5th and back to 1st within 100yds, skidding, reversing round the whole car park, going from one space to another, getting him to park in 10 spaces within a minute...whatever I could think of.... backwards, forwards, sideways, speeding, super late emergency stops. Three weeks later he passed his test 1st time and to date hasn't crashed.

 

[Robobum]

Takes two to have an accident though, so if the ones crashing were any good, they could have avoided it.

My only car accident in 22 years of driving was after being driven in to by a 62 year old. It was a on large fast moving roundabout on a motorway junction.

They believed that they could stay in the left hand lane and go all the way round a roundabout to exit at the same jct they came onto the roundabout.

I was halfway into the 2nd exit off the roundabout when they drove into my car just behind the passenger side door. The driver who was directly behind her did well to avoid ploughing into the back of us both.

She was totally oblivious to anything going on around her. It may have been her first accident ever, she may have only avoided other carnage by luck.

The only "positive" thing from that crash was that I had just picked it up from the garage after having the heater fixed. At least I was warm whilst I sat there waiting for the Police/ AA.

 

[USER1999]

Driving all the way round in the left hand lane is pretty common, especially round my way, I pretty much see it every week. You should be looking out for it. I do.

 

[Robobum]

After that day, I do.

Hindsight would be wonderful (or even being able to swivel head like an owl so i could've see her earlier!! )

So retakes for over 50s are out, but everyone els has to alter the way they drive to avoid the incompetent then?

 

[19th]

[quote}
I was halfway into the 2nd exit off the roundabout when they drove into my car just behind the passenger side door. The driver who was directly behind her did well to avoid ploughing into the back of us both.


[/QUOTE]

I am trying to see, in my minds eye, how a car in the lane following you could hit your side door?

 

[Robobum]

[quote}
I was halfway into the 2nd exit off the roundabout when they drove into my car just behind the passenger side door. The driver who was directly behind her did well to avoid ploughing into the back of us both.

I am trying to see, in my minds eye, how a car in the lane following you could hit your side door?

[/QUOTE]

It's a 4 lane roundabout, I was in the 2nd lane turning into the outside lane of the dual carriageway for my exit.

You're not over 50 are you??

 

[JustOne]

...but everyone els has to alter the way they drive to avoid the incompetent then?

Don't we do that already?

It's known as 'watching out for women drivers'.

 

[chrisd]

Don't we do that already?

It's known as 'watching out for women drivers'.

Question - why do women drivers insist on driving on the outside lane of a dual carriageway for it's full length???


Chris