Big brother??

[Bob]

*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
Mike, I wouldnt bank on that. Thats not the way insurance companies work. Do you actually think your
rates will go DOWN? Not a chance. They will keep the same 'ownership' type base rate then rape you
for all the additional miles you drive. They dont have good regulation and get to call their own
shots. This may work to our advantage in the beginning (when we buy into it because they are telling
us its good) but then the rules will change and we will get screwed.
Bob

Mike Arman wrote:

> *This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
>
> >Subject: Re: Bend over - here come the insurance companies again
> >
> >
> >AUGH!  too big brother!  just wait till they make it mandatory on all cars!=
> >  gah!
> >
> >On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 03:16:07PM +0100, Phil Payne wrote:
> >> http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/newsid_1831000/1831181.stm
> >>
> >> I hate to think ...
> >>
>
> Article refers to a black box which tells how many miles you drive, charges
> your insurance premium accordingly. Evidently there's a low "base rate",
> and then a mileage charge.
>
> Now think about this a moment . . . here in Amurrica, where everyone has
> two, three, or four cars, and there's only ONE licensed driver, this would
> really make sense. Right now, I have two cars and three motorcycles - and
> despite that fact that I can only drive one vehicle at a time, I get to pay
> FULL insurance on EACH of the vehicles - 100% of the money for a vehicle
> used say, 30% of the time.
>
> I also need a small van or pickup every once in a while - I can buy some
> beater for $500 which will do just fine, but I'll pay twice that in
> insurance every year, even though the vehicle won't go 200 miles a year.
> Obviously not practical, and ONLY because of the way insurance is written.
> You can't tell me that a 200 mile a year vehicle has the same exposure as a
> 20,000 mile a year one - and the rates are almost the same!
>
> Where's the fairness in that? Why would I need (and why should I pay for)
> liability insurance on a vehicle that isn't running right now? If I do a
> major repair, the vehicle may not move for two months, why am I paying
> insurance on something which poses no risk to anyone?
>
> Personally, I'd LOVE the idea of a base rate plus a pay-by-the-mile charge
> based on USE, instead of simply OWNERSHIP, which is what we effectively
> have now. Oh, yeah, I do get a multi-vehicle discount, but it is something
> like 5 to 7% - whoopee.
>
> Here's where big brother might do us some good.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Mike Arman