Safe Speed Forums

Mrs Gatsobait and I were having one of those "if we were in charge" discussions the other day, and she came up with a good idea to encourage drivers to take IAM, though it could just as easily apply to RoSPA etc. Very simply it's this: reduced or even zero insurance tax for advanced drivers.

Pros -
The insurance companies won't have their profits affected so have no reason to oppose it.
Those with higher premiums, and therefore are presumably higher risks, will get a larger reduction and so have the most incentive to get advanced training.

Cons-
The Treasury has to find somewhere else to replace the revenue if a lot of drivers go for it, though possibly the improvement in driver standards might reduce costs elsewhere.
Depending on how it would operate it might require a database detailing who's got what advanced qualifications to ensure no cheating, and there'd be a cost involved there (though again, with enough better quality drivers money might be saved elsewhere).

Any more pros and cons? Or ideas about how such a scheme could operate simply and efficiently (and therefore cheaply). I wonder if it could be done by the insurer asking for the relevant certificate before issuing a cover note or insurance certificate. That would be similar to how my current insurer worked regarding my car alarm and immobiliser - the quote was subject to them seeing the certificate that it was Thatcham approved and fitted properly, after which they put it back in the post with the insurance docs. If it could be properly overseen by DoT or someone would that be feasible?

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

A nice idea in theory, but IPT is only 5% so it wouldn't be very much of an incentive for most people.

Also there would be the issue of how to treat it if other non-advanced drivers were on the policy. And there would be no incentive for company car drivers, who do disproportionately high mileages.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

D'oh! I thought it was 10% . Still, even at 5% younger drivers suffering from high premiums might recoup the cost of training in a couple of years, and arguably it's the inexperienced who'd benefit most from advanced training.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

The financial benefit would have to be much higher than s single figure % reduction in premium. when i did the IAM test at 20yrs old (partly for that insurance) i found that the companies that would give a discount (usually 5%) were still more expensive than 'regular' prices quotes from other companies.

Exactly what Mrs Gatsobait found. I was getting better quotes for a faster car without IAM than she was for 2.0 saloon and an IAM pass. As a result she changed insurers and let her membership lapse since cheaper insurance was the main reason she did it in the first place. I agree that single digit discounts aren't a big enough incentive for most drivers, and that problem is exacerbated by the fact that only a handful of insurance companies give anything at all, and they're often pricey to start with.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

One is therefore forced to wonder whether, in fact, IAM members have a statistically significant improvement in accident record than the public at large... Anybody know?

_________________
"Politicians are the same the world over... We build bridges where there aren't any rivers." - Nikita Kruschev

Does it have to be IAM/RoSPA? This gets drivers to a very high standard with the right amount of training. Could you take elements of the training, linked to the most common causes of accidents and provide a shorter more focused 'intermediate' course? More relevant to people who think IAM is overkill, less scary to people who think a police level driver will be sitting there saying their gear changing isn't sweet enough. Get people thinking about COAST & issues like tailgating etc. DON'T fixate on speed limit as a panacea for road safety.

Subsidise costs significantly. -'Pump prime' initially with, oooh... lets think, maybe a chunk of £700 million worth of speeding fines...

Get govt into mindset of of paying for road safety rather than profiting from lack of it.

dangerous precident.

not a big leap to funding air ambulances etc from the fines.

I was being cheeky about where the funding comes from don't care which pot its from really.

The point I was wanting to make was that road safety needs spending and investment rather than blind threats to speed 'transgressors' who may or may not be riskier than 'non-transgressors'.

In the NHS we spend time and money on supporting people to stop smoking face to face, or in groups (100,000 smoking deaths v 3000 road deaths a year). People said they wanted this intensive level of support and its working. What we do know is that historical scare tactics (Smoking Kills) make people aware but don't change behaviour significantly. Hence 70% of smokers want to quit but need more help.

And then we look at the 'Speed Kills' approach. All posters, adverts & cameras and no individual help to avoid accidents.

TBH, in my case, the incentive is for personal improvement, saving money would be a bonus. Whilst I haven't done a proper course as such, I've read the books and put stuff into practice on the road. The other form of advanced driving which involves learning better car control can be learned at track days and/or by taking part in drifting or handling days, you have much fun too, and you're better placed to deal with emergency situations that you haven't anticipated on when you return to the road, of course this is as long as you don't drive on the road like you're on a track day.

To get the masses to participate, you'd have to make it law sadly, or get positive points (or loose penalty points) on your driving licence.

_________________
www.clubrwd.com - For all things rear wheel drive

Now strange , since in my quest this year for a better deal ( cheap insurance, remember the fracas in the 60/70 when companies folded overnight-i do) and i had hoped to reap the benefits of no fags for almost 2 years - but no - the insurance companies had more important things to ask - "your phne number, day/night/mobile" -- then i found out why -one company called 5 times in 4 days till i threatened to call the financial services.
"Can we offer you home insurance" was another - my reply - go forth and multiply.
But at the end of the day , clean licence, not to old and length of licence paid off.(Better get the wife trained to spot scams now to keep the clean licence)