1 in 14 drivers in Ireland uninsured

punisher5112

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Insurance policies throughout the EU should have standard policy number format, something like an IBAN. For getting motor tax or at any checkpoint it should be possible to establish the current status of that policy, who is entitled to drive on it, the vehicles it covers etc.

Pps number anyone legally here will have one.

GreenFolder2

Renegade Mechanic wrote: »

The claims are a problem, but they're also a convenient scapegoat. The insurance industry lost WAY more money, gambling on the bond market than Dave with his "nightmares" is costing them. But it's a little easier for the public to swallow, I guess, than "yeah, we lost our arse and are going to go ahead and do pretty much what the banks did, now pay up, common pleb, like you always do".

That's the last of competition side of things. If you've an oligopoly of insurers that are milking us recoup losses, we need to be bringing healthy operators into the market. It's not fair to create these little walled garden markets where new players aren't getting in.

The banking market is the same nonsense. It's all about ensuring 4 screwed up banks are kept safe from the big bad world of healthy banks that could undercut them.

wonski

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Insurance policies throughout the EU should have standard policy number format, something like an IBAN. For getting motor tax or at any checkpoint it should be possible to establish the current status of that policy, who is entitled to drive on it, the vehicles it covers etc.

We would have to pay €1000 each every year for next 5-10 years to implement this

Thanks, but no to that.

bear1

They have an interesting system here in Poland.
Motor tax is included in the fuel costs but it also means the higher the price of oil the more motor tax you pay.
Insurance is mandatory even if the car is parked up (which I don't like at all) but their 3rd party rates are fairly reasonable.
For my Passat I've got full insurance and tbh it's quite expensive at just over 600e for the year and that's 120e more than last year.
It isn't just in Ireland that rates are increasing.
But at least here it's the car that is insured and not the driver so you can have many people driving the car for 0 extra and it's still fully insured.

joint operation

the only thing i can say about the insuracne system in this country is **** *** * ******* ****** ** ****** ********

ShadowHearth

wonski wrote: »

Was bored and reading that thread made me look at what I might need to pay in February...

Last year renewed with 123 as all other options were no go.

I hope they will offer me another renewal, and I do hope it is going to be three digits starting with 5 or 6... Paid ~500 to 600 in last 3-4 years.

Was thinking of getting 2.5 v6, but a bit newer (05), but I might reconsider if that's the way my experience and no claims history is rewarded.

I am 30 with 8NCB and the way things going I am happy to get a qoute for 1K or under.
I went through all insurance companies this year to insure my 04 alfa gt 1.9 diesel amd it was from 1.4k-3k. When one broker gave me 1K I almost took her hand off. Payed off fully 1K 1 months before my insurance experied.

Atlantic Dawn

Wish they would setup an ANPR camera on a road for a day and check what the actual rate is.

wonski

ShadowHearth wrote: »

I am 30 with 8NCB and the way things going I am happy to get a qoute for 1K or under.
I went through all insurance companies this year to insure my 04 alfa gt 1.9 diesel amd it was from 1.4k-3k. When one broker gave me 1K I almost took her hand off. Payed off fully 1K 1 months before my insurance experied.

Just rang 123 regarding a car I might buy this week and was surprised to be told no extra premium (except regular 40 euro charge).

I asked and was told that I should be fine as, in general, existing customers don't get robbed.

That explains no quote in last two years tbh. Keep the ones like me happy, but don't get any more of them on board...

Strange, but true.

hi_im_fil

I haven't read the full thread so I am not sure if this has been mentioned, but are the stats 1 in 14 drivers are uninsured or 1 in 14 cars uninsured? Because there is a big difference and the data used to get the stats can be skewed to portray a certain message. I would say there are thousands of cars that do not have a valid insurance policy on them and are not physically in the road but just have not been properly declared off the road. Also, many thousands of cars which are scrapped but have not been put through the correct scrappage procedure and thus the system still thinks they are on the road.

wonski

hi_im_fil wrote: »

I haven't read the full thread so I am not sure if this has been mentioned, but are the stats 1 in 14 drivers are uninsured or 1 in 14 cars uninsured? Because there is a big difference and the data used to get the stats can be skewed to portray a certain message. I would say there are thousands of cars that do not have a valid insurance policy on them and are not physically in the road but just have not been properly declared off the road. Also, many thousands of cars which are scrapped but have not been put through the correct scrappage procedure and thus the system still thinks they are on the road.

1 in 14 cars

Skewed as hell.

Special Circumstances

It's basically fake news.

ShadowHearth

wonski wrote: »

Just rang 123 regarding a car I might buy this week and was surprised to be told no extra premium (except regular 40 euro charge).

I asked and was told that I should be fine as, in general, existing customers don't get robbed.

That explains no quote in last two years tbh. Keep the ones like me happy, but don't get any more of them on board...

Strange, but true.

123.ie were ***** all together to me.
I got a qoute of them for 840, when I called to finalise it it rose up to 1500eu!!! I was like wtf?!
So appearantly because I changed my driving license from full eu to Irish one 5 years ago they see me having driving license only for 5 years in total, not 12. Irony is I got 8NCB. I guess I got 3ncb without driving license. Good logic. :Pac:
Liberty always kept even the cars I always drove were always on their nono list. As soon as I went from skylines amd subarus to sensible 1.9 diesel it went from 800eu to 1600eu! I just needed to keep subaru...

uck51js9zml2yt

goz83 wrote: »

That's easily said until you're the one who is injured. And I don't blame you, as I would have had a similar point of view until someone injured me in a serious way, all the while having to see the other party telling lies and denying liability :mad:

And prices wouldn't drop. The insurance companies would just find another tale to tell. It only drops when it suits them.



But it's not mandatory to have insurance when taxing a car. These things love to be complicated in Ireland.

It is mandatory. A car will not be taxed if uninsured. That there is no way of verifying the "insurance details " given is another matter!

Cheensbo

So long as there's 'driving other cars' cover, and motor insurance is based on the person and not the vehicle - a massive anpr rollout is going to be an exercise in wasting time, there'll be a shít load of false positives for the aforementioned reasons.

The whole basis of motor insurance and the industry behind it here are a massive load of crap.

You insure yourself but it's based on a certain car, and the premium is heavily based on this car.

Yet the car is not insured for others, unless named, but wait:

You can base your insurance policy on a brand new 5 star ncap rated 1.0 engined car - and spend all of your time driving in a (legally insured) non ncap tested car of unlimited power and modification.

It's just a massive load of nonsense.

compulsory third party needs to be a part of motor tax, then optional increased cover after that. It's the only way this silly mess is going to go away.

punisher5112

Kohen Yummy Drink wrote: »

It is mandatory. A car will not be taxed if uninsured. That there is no way of verifying the "insurance details " given is another matter!

You can as you can enter whatever you like online.

Wheeliebin30

65 million a year it costs irish tax payer paying out for people who have no insurance!

What a joke.

CJhaughey

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

65 million a year it costs irish tax payer paying out for people who have no insurance!

What a joke.

See thats the issue, 65m paid by anyone who buys insurance is a joke but ask yourself does the goverment really care?
They take a cut of every policy so its not in the govts interest to deal with it.
This is one instance where the Govt needs to do what it is supposed to do, Govern.
It would take a bit of work to setup a state system where 3rd party insurance is automatically covered by a levy through fuel which would be better than through motor tax.
That ensures that all motorists in the state would pay into a fund which would compensate injured parties.
If they wanted to they could set this up but as I have said before it would mean a drop in the large amounts of free cash floating about and that wouldn't suit many companies or indeed some politicians who may or may not have benefited from largesse from the insurance industry.
Having a levy on fuel would mean that any driver in the state who bought fuel would be paying into the system whether or not they had bought motor tax.
I would think this would be a more equitable system than the unworkable ANPR system that the MIBI and Insurance Ireland seem to think will be a magic bullet.

Dravokivich

seamus wrote: »

As pointed out already, uninsured drivers are in fact way overrepresented in the statistics for crashes and claims. If 1-in-14 drivers are uninsured, and 1-in-3 accidents involves an uninsured driver, then that means that an uninsured driver is 4.5 times more likely to be involved in an accident than an insured one. Which, interestingly, is about the same risk increase as being at the drink-driving limit. So clearly they are far from "the most careful and alert drivers".

For obvious reasons, they're the least socially conscious and civic-minded people on the road and therefore likely to be completely ignorant of many other areas of road law and safety. Sure if you haven't got insurance, why bother with tax or an NCT? Why stop at red lights, why give way to pedestrians?

Uninsured drivers are a pox on the roads. There's no excuse for it. If you're caught more than once, there should be jail time at a minimum.

I don't like when the stats say "involved. Tell me who was to blame. I don't want to be negatively assessed due to my profile if it turns out I'm more likely to be a victim than the cause.

wonski

Dravokivich wrote: »

I don't like when the stats say "involved. Tell me who was to blame. I don't want to be negatively assessed due to my profile if it turns out I'm more likely to be a victim than the cause.

Well, when a driver doesn't give a ****, he is more likely to crash, even if he is not at fault, just involved.

The very same way drunk or stoned driver can be involved in accident by braking suddenly etc.

He is not at fault, but has contributed to the collision.

The way the law is designed means that You might be find at fault even if you did nothing wrong ( someone swerving into your lane just in front of you without warning etc...).

I don't even go into crash for cash incidents, when you don't even need a valid policy to get a payout. How cool is that?

jackofalltrades

Not surprised the number of uninsured drivers are going up.
The recent price hikes are pricing the most cost sensitive drivers out of the market.
If you were open to the idea of driving uninsured, then a quote double what you were paying last year will push you over the edge.
Not quoting older cars just makes the situation worse.

Insurance companies should be forced to quote everyone in a market where insurance is mandatory.
Also we need a proper ANPR system.
I passed one check point this year where I live, I was being flashed repeatedly by others drivers on the run up to it.
The chances of being caught have to increase dramatically until it's just not worth your while.

Arcade_Tryer

CalamariFritti wrote: »

And while I know about poor public service infrastructure and all that, driving is not an entitlement.

But it is a necessity for many living in rural areas.

The "not entitled to drive" argument used to be in relation to passing the test and getting a full license. Now it means being able to afford to drive.

myshirt wrote: »

How about 10 years off the road, and an attachment order to any earnings or income you have for the same period; take money from you, week on week, every week, until you f#cking learn.

Learn what? That they're poor? I'd say they already know tbh.

The Muppet

Easy solution but basic 3rd party insurance and motor tax on fuel . QED

goz83

The Muppet wrote: »

Easy solution but basic 3rd party insurance and motor tax on fuel . QED

The orders of browns envelopes would fall dramatically

bear1

The Muppet wrote: »

Easy solution but basic 3rd party insurance and motor tax on fuel . QED

So fuel would be what? 3e a litre?

seamus

The Muppet wrote: »

Easy solution but basic 3rd party insurance and motor tax on fuel . QED

And watch the number of claims skyrocket.

Pranged your car off a wall? Sure just say you were hit by someone who drove off! Bingo-bango. Sure don't I already pay for it in my fuel, why shouldn't I get something out of it? I think my neck hurts a bit too, may as well throw that in to get my money's worth.

Cheensbo

seamus wrote: »

And watch the number of claims skyrocket.

Pranged your car off a wall? Sure just say you were hit by someone who drove off! Bingo-bango. Sure don't I already pay for it in my fuel, why shouldn't I get something out of it? I think my neck hurts a bit too, may as well throw that in to get my money's worth.

Doesn't happen in the countries that it's been implemented in, Australia, for example - don't have a huge claim culture, and every car is insured for a licenced driver once it has "rego" (tax) paid....

Anyway, what's the difference between your interpretation and the current - "my neck hurts" setup??

seamus

Cheensbo wrote: »

Doesn't happen in the countries that it's been implemented in, Australia, for example - don't have a huge claim culture, and every car is insured for a licenced driver once it has "rego" (tax) paid....

That's a different system. Insurance with the rego is paid on a yearly basis like an insurance policy, and still requires you to provide personal details, etc. You can also opt out of it if you've arranged cover yourself.

Adding it as a fuel surcharge is a different thing entirely.

Anyway, what's the difference between your interpretation and the current - "my neck hurts" setup??

People understand what insurance is for and consider it a good year if you don't get anything out of it.
But in the same way that people claim all of the benefits they can because they feel they're entitled to them for paying tax, paying an insurance "tax" on top of your fuel changes the dynamic. So a lot of people will consider it a "tax" that they deserve to get something back from.

Cheensbo

seamus wrote: »

That's a different system. Insurance with the rego is paid on a yearly basis like an insurance policy, and still requires you to provide personal details, etc. You can also opt out of it if you've arranged cover yourself.

Adding it as a fuel surcharge is a different thing entirely.
People understand what insurance is for and consider it a good year if you don't get anything out of it.
But in the same way that people claim all of the benefits they can because they feel they're entitled to them for paying tax, paying an insurance "tax" on top of your fuel changes the dynamic. So a lot of people will consider it a "tax" that they deserve to get something back from.

Aha, sorry, it's early. I get your point, the rego/tax idea would probably fare out better given all that so?

The Muppet

bear1 wrote: »

So fuel would be what? 3e a litre?

Doubt it very much as every vehicle on the road would be paying. It works in other countries so why not here.

The Muppet

seamus wrote: »

But in the same way that people claim all of the benefits they can because they feel they're entitled to them for paying tax, paying an insurance "tax" on top of your fuel changes the dynamic. So a lot of people will consider it a "tax" that they deserve to get something back from.

That claim culture is in existence as it is and it needs to be address too.