Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Pay as you drive (ride?) insurance...

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by dan, May 4, 2005.

  1. This type of insurance is become more popular overseas, can lead to cheaper premiums for younger drivers and people who don't driver very often. Basically they stick a GPS unit in your vehicle, which tells them how far you travel (and probably how fast etc) and you only pay for how many miles you do, and in some cases your driving style.

    Wouldn't be surprised if this came to bikes sooner rather than later.


    Could be controversial... :?

  2. Stuff that for an idea. I've heard of car hire companies who've installed GPS tracking units in their vehicles pinging customers when they download the data after the car's returned. Where speed exceedences are indicated, the customer suddenly finds an extra debit on his credit card.

    Mind you, this was in the US and I think the various customers concerned took a class action suit against the hire company. Still, you never know what they could do here.

    You reckon!!!??

    Imagine having a bingle. You submit a claim for repairs. Sorry, says the insurer. But 2 months ago, on ten different occasions your bike was recorded doing in excess of 120 km/h, the point at which you lose your licence, and which speed is considered to be dangerous.

    Never mind that the current claim for repairs is the result of a kangaroo that hit you, or an uninsured driver without a zack to his name.....
  3. stuff that for a bad idea. sif it would be any better for under 25s. i ride all the time and yeah that speed limit thing. but i can see how weekend riders and old ladies who go to the shop only on thursdays could benefit. buuuut like you said and mjt said, they'll refuse a claim cause you broke the speed limit by 4 and a half kilometres and hour when overtaking on the m5 just before the liverpool exit. it could get very controversial! not to mention expensive in court.
  4. Nope sounds like a bad idea. Insurance is supposedly based on risk, why should someone that only rides at the weekend pay less than me? I think that they perhaps are a bigger risk due to the fact that they are getting less experience than I am when I'm on the road everyday. Still think the best thing is to make private insurance compulsory and do away with the TAC component of the rego.
  5. TAC component of rego has nothing to do with repairing vehicles.
    It is an insurance against injuries.
    There should at least be compulsory third party accident insurance. So that if someone hits your vehicle they have the means to oapy for it.
  6. reply

    Ths will bring a few screams.

    I reckon the compulsory third party insurance should be on the licenc. That way we get the numbskulls off the road. if the insurance company does not want to insure you because of you record, guess what? You are OFF the road until you can get insurance.
    That would make teh drongos behave.

    All drivers should have compulsory 3rd party property insurance as well.
    Not on the car, on the driver. A car has never caused an accident yet. It is always the loose nut behind the wheel or on the handlebars.

    I we had that system, there would be fewer crashes as drivers would lose their licence because of even minor bingles.

  7. Re: reply

    What about those who take out full comprehensive? Should then, there be a rebate or a refund or whatever for the compulsory 3rd party property insurance?

    I doubt that social groups would think too kindly of this suggestion, particularly those single vehicle families who struggle just to make the insurance and other costs on that particular vehicle.

    And as a lefty kinda guy at times, I have this objection to private insurers being able to participate in a compulsory insurance scheme such as the case is in NSW and some other states. This allows them to set their premiums based solely on profit margins, rather than on services.

    For example, if in NSW you come off your bike, say due to a 'roo clouting you, or a slippery oil covered road or a hit-run driver who can't be ID'ed, then you're knackered. Your insurance doesn't cover you, because it is what the description says - only for third parties. And to add insult to injury, the cops will slap a negligent driving charge on you, thus further making a bad hair day worse.

    At least the TAC system that we have here in Victoria is a no fault scheme that actually works. Not only that, it returns a dividend to the government, after meeting its obligations towards injured road users. It is also far cheaper than what the private insurers charge motorcyclists in NSW, as anyone from that state who may be reading this will attest to.

    As an example, I ride a CBR1000 road bike. My TAC charge this year was around $340. All up on road rego inc. registration, TAC and other taxes was under $400. I've read posts in forums such as aus.motorcycles where they're talking about $500 or so for 3rd party insurance for what they call "pink slip renewals" (I think that is what color they are).

    NSW is a larger state, thus you'd think that economies of scale should dictate lower charges. But it doesn't appear to be the case. When private insurers play in a market where its a compulsory one, then it's a licence to print money. Ditto for the health insurance industry.