Young Drivers

tadah said:
They wont resrict power or engine size i dont think.
Click to expand...

They should do. It should be down to size of vehicle. So small hatch type cars are lower powered than larger cars.

While they are at it cars might as well be restricted. What's the point of cars that can do over 100mph with a max legal speed limit of 70mph?

It's about time you were not allowed to stupidly modify cars either. The other week a lad was selling a corsa on ebay. He was bragging how it was still insured as a 1.0 GL or something when it had the 2.0L 16 valve engine out of a Vectra.
 
Neil said:
While they are at it cars might as well be restricted. What's the point of cars that can do over 100mph with a max legal speed limit of 70mph?
Click to expand...

It has been commented on in this forum that more mature drivers regularly travel on motorways at over 70mph.
I'm sorry but do people really think that all 17+ year olds want to speed and cause accidents, then there's a point in your late twenties when you suddenly become a great driver??
It's ludicrous.
 
Of course there is such a thing as a safe uninsured driver. just because you dont have insurance it doesnt mean you race around streets. Sorry but when you buy the car its yours and you can do whatever you want to it as far as im concerned without making it unsafe in anyway. And who here is going to say that they have never gone over the speed limit because ill call you a liar right now. everyone as at some point.
 
Wow, those rates for young drivers is mad! Annie got her license when she turned 16 and I was complaining about a $350 (~200pd) increase to our rates. I believe a 16 year old male over here would be about double that.

She did get a hefty discount for getting good grades. Also, by law, she's not allowed to drive with anyone (except family) under 18, cannot have more then one passenger (except family), and is not allowed to use a cellphone while driving.

Interesting point about young male drivers. She had 4 close male friends have accidents where they totalled their cars. All but one going off the road and either hitting trees or flipping over into a ditch. Luckily they were all unhurt but an unfortunate lesson learned (I hope)!

Brian
 
shakermaker said:
I'm sorry but do people really think that all 17+ year olds want to speed and cause accidents
It's ludicrous.
Click to expand...

I have helped several people through their driving test two of which where my own children, but the main thing that was always told to anyone is that no matter how much it costs, to drive a car it must be legal. For you to say that there are plenty of safe uninsured drivers shows that you are a risk to the greater good and are doing nothing worthwhile to promote the idea of safe young drivers.

However I do know many people over a wide age range from 17 to 80 odd that are responsible drivers because they won't drive without the relevant documents no matter what age they are.

This should be encouraged in, and by, everyone.
 
Just curious, maybe a good poll question. Is there any interest as to what goes on over here in questions responses like I just made:confused: ? I could easily enough refrain!:rolleyes:

Brian

Oh, forgot to mentioned it is require that all drivers have insurance. I expect there are probaly 10 - 20% that drive without it but that's okay, these are the same blokes who don't have a license or it had been suspended.
 
Last edited:
LancYorkYankee said:
Just curious, maybe a good poll question. Is there any interest as to what goes on over here in questions responses like I just made:confused: ? I could easily enough refrain!:rolleyes:

Brian
Click to expand...

No need to refrain from commenting,it gives us extra food for thought as to how we could perhaps alter the way things are done, if we could for example adopt your way of insuring a young person and they were willing to adhere to the restrictions you mention perhaps a decent compromise could be reached?
 
shakermaker said:
We need to remember that there's a lot of very safe uninsured drivers aswell as the bad ones.
Click to expand...

That post should win a no brainer award. How on earth can someone without insurance be classed as safe?
Someone without insurance should be fined twice the yearly cost that insurance for the car they are driving would have cost them and be banned for 2 years.
 
Neil said:
That post should win a no brainer award. How on earth can someone without insurance be classed as safe?
Someone without insurance should be fined twice the yearly cost that insurance for the car they are driving would have cost them and be banned for 2 years.
Click to expand...

I could see an uninsured driver still being a safe driver. Maybe they can't afford those high rates? Wouldn't make them at all honest but may not affect them being safe or not. Heck, might make em safer as they would be less apt to break the law so they could go undetected eh?

Brian
 
LancYorkYankee said:
I could see an uninsured driver still being a safe driver. Maybe they can't afford those high rates? Wouldn't make them at all honest but may not affect them being safe or not. Heck, might make em safer as they would be less apt to break the law so they could go undetected eh?

Brian
Click to expand...

Here we will have to differ, any motor vehicle on the move is a risk to anyone else in the area, the only responsible thing so far as that vehicle is concerned is for it to be legal. After that if you hit and maime/kill someone at least there should be some compensation, though I do wonder if that would be enough to cover personal guilt (as in, If only I'd done things a little differently, nagging doubts I imagine would always be with you).
 
Very excellent point Less! I was more thinking of the insurance being on the driver rather than on the vehicle. I believe over here, I am covered by insurance whenever I step in a vehicle. Either way you're right. One must consider the selfishness of driving uninsured!

Brian
 
LancYorkYankee said:
Very excellent point Less! I was more thinking of the insurance being on the driver rather than on the vehicle. I believe over here, I am covered by insurance whenever I step in a vehicle. Either way you're right. One must consider the selfishness of driving uninsured!
Brian
Click to expand...

Most driver here in the uk over the age of 25 also have the privalege of driving other motor cars, be it Third Party Only cover, they are still legal.

If the car was on a hill and the handbrake failed (I have seen a few of these) the car rolls down the hill and causes damage, whos paying if the car isnt insured.

A safe uninsured driver. yes they are about, but as said this doesnt help when the brakes fail or a tyre blows and they cause a RTA with injury to other INNOCENT partys.

I feel the passenger restriction rule would be a step in the right direction though.
 
***Mr D*** said:
Most driver here in the uk over the age of 25 also have the privalege of driving other motor cars, be it Third Party Only cover, they are still legal.
Click to expand...

I think if you read the small print on your insurance documents it will say you are covered 3rd party on any car but, only when that car does not belong to you and is already insured by it's owner.
 
Neil said:
I think if you read the small print on your insurance documents it will say you are covered 3rd party on any car but, only when that car does not belong to you and is already insured by it's owner.
Click to expand...

I have yet to read any small print the say the other car must be insured.

The vehicle must not belong to the proposer or be hired to him under a hire purchase agreement. This is the typical wording.
 
i mentioned this before

i rang tescos whe i was asking about when i was looking at another car and to drive it home i would have t eiter switch my policy to the car or make sure the owner of teh car i was buying had insurance

i rang again recently after having this discussion and was told that i could not drive another car on my fully comp policy unless the cars owner also had insurance
 
chav1 said:
i mentioned this before

i rang tescos whe i was asking about when i was looking at another car and to drive it home i would have t eiter switch my policy to the car or make sure the owner of teh car i was buying had insurance

i rang again recently after having this discussion and was told that i could not drive another car on my fully comp policy unless the cars owner also had insurance
Click to expand...

I have read 20+ Policies. I have spoke to people with a lot of Insurance Knowledge.

98% of Policies - Some may be badly worded

If you are granted the Driving Other Cars Extention. 98% of policies the other car.
DOES NOT NEED TO BE INSURED
 
Taken From Tesco's Policy Wording.

Section A - Third Party Liability
  1. Indemnity to the Policyholder

    We will indemnify You against legal liability for damages, claimants costs and expenses in the event of an accident
    Involving:
    1. Your Car.
    2. The driving by You, with the owner's permission, of any motor Car not belonging to You and not hired to You under a hire purchase agreement provided that:
      1. You are entitled by Your effective Certificate of Motor Insurance to drive such a Car.
      2. You observe the licence conditions applicable.
      3. There is no other insurance in force which covers the same claim.
      4. The Car is being driven in Great Britain, Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, the Isle of Man or the Channel Islands.
      In respect of:
      1. Death of or bodily injury to any person.
      2. Damage to property up to a maximum of twenty million pounds subject to General Exception 5.
    Commentary

    This Section shows the cover provided for claims made by other parties for bodily injury or damage to their property.
    This part covers claims made against You.
    Cover operates for accidents involving Your Car or (if You are permitted in the Certificate) while You are driving someone else's Car.
    If your Certificate permits You to drive someone else's Car then it should only be in the event of an emergency.
    THIS SECTION DOES NOT COVER ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE TO Your Car OR THE CAR YOU ARE DRIVING.
Who ever you spoke to at tesco's gave you wrong information IMO.
 
LancYorkYankee said:
Oh, forgot to mentioned it is require that all drivers have insurance. I expect there are probaly 10 - 20% that drive without it but that's okay, these are the same blokes who don't have a license or it had been suspended.
Click to expand...

That's the same as here I would guess. The problem here is that the fines for driving without insurance are a lot less than the insurance itself, which is barmy.

The insurance for young people over there sounds far more affordable.
 
Insurance is simply too high for a young driver. I get paid 176 quid a month and I could barely pay the insurance on a car. Now thats not including buying, servicing, running the car or the 76 quid a month that I put into a savings account etc.

So getting a car is pretty much out of the question for me, my plan is to get the license as soon as I turn 17 before the test gets harder and then wait until I come out of uni to get a car, when, despite the fact I will have gone over 4 years without driving, my insurance will be lower.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top