Car Insurance Anomily

handyman · Unread post by **handyman** » 26 Sep 2011, 22:00

Hi Dickie, that map is a very interesting if somewhat obvious illustration. At least it confirms the places to avoid in the UK.

I could not see any information about the black areas on the map. Are these the places where you only need insurance when you get caught?

H

DickieG · Unread post by **DickieG** » 26 Sep 2011, 22:52

handyman wrote:Hi Dickie, that map is a very interesting if somewhat obvious illustration. At least it confirms the places to avoid in the UK.

I could not see any information about the black areas on the map. Are these the places where you only need insurance when you get caught?

Further information on that here I think they relate to the top ten Police areas although I counted eleven

handyman · Unread post by **handyman** » 26 Sep 2011, 23:28

Hi Dickie, the stats for the Smoke are a little disconcerting! One in ten drivers uninsured, not that I drive in London much now, as I let the train take the strain.

How good are these ANPR systems in collaring the little blighters? Are they all they're cracked up to be? Or are the Mets rozzers not up to the job of catching these sods?

These stats are a very good argument for putting insurance, or part of it, onto fuel. Mind, t'Goverment will probably find a way to add value to give more into the Bankers Benevolent Fund.

Handyman

DickieG · Unread post by **DickieG** » 27 Sep 2011, 00:24

handyman wrote:Hi Dickie, the stats for the Smoke are a little disconcerting! One in ten drivers uninsured, not that I drive in London much now, as I let the train take the strain.

How good are these ANPR systems in collaring the little blighters? Are they all they're cracked up to be? Or are the Mets rozzers not up to the job of catching these sods?

These stats are a very good argument for putting insurance, or part of it, onto fuel. Mind, t'Goverment will probably find a way to add value to give more into the Bankers Benevolent Fund.

I've not used ANPR but I understand it works quite well, the big problem now is that like me Police are leaving in their hundreds every week. In my unit if we were to stick to the government target of a 15% reduction in manning levels it needs to go on a recruitment drive, its that bad so the amount of officers on patrol is dropping dramatically and so are the chances of stopping offenders. Traffic Patrol are now looked on as an expensive luxury as its not seen as sexy prosecuting motorists, that fact that Traffic Dept is there to save people lives is ignored by MP's. One good thing about ANPR is that when cars are stopped and found to be without insurance the car is seized so it is having some effect.

London is such a large and densely populated area with the Police getting little backing from the courts it makes it too easy for offenders to escape justice. Just trying to find out who it is you've actually stopped is quite some task when they give false details etc. Even if you arrest someone in order to identify their true identity, when they get to court they get bail as the government puts pressure on courts to reduce the number of people being remanded in custody. I did this several times but not once the court refuse bail even to caravan utilising nomadic travellers, needless to say they are never seen again. Then even if you try to follow up and list them as wanted its seen as too expensive to justify the effort. Needless to say the effect on Police morale and the desire to see things through to get a successful conclusion become diminished, who wouldn't end up feeling like that? Sad but true.

Outside London courts are far more supportive of Police even to the point of writing a statement, in London unless your arrest notes were written immediately after the event then date and time stamped at the time, a court will throw them out whereas just over the border in Thames Valley a statement could be written even days later and still be accepted by the court, trust me justice depends very much upon where you live. Have job go to Snaresbrook Crown court in east London and if the case is one of theft you have little chance of getting a conviction, however if the allegation has anything to do with inappropriate sexual behaviour, particularly towards children a conviction can be almost guaranteed before you even start due to the area the jury's are selected from.

The trouble with putting insurance on fuel is that there'd be little incentive to avoid collisions as it won't directly affect the 'offender'.

Gibbo2286 · Unread post by **Gibbo2286** » 27 Sep 2011, 10:23

My brother's in Brisbane Australia, their car registration (road tax) includes an automatic 3rd party insurance. The problem there is that the criminals don't register the cars and at the moment their police don't have the power to confiscate the cars.

One thing about policing Dickie, having watched a few of the 'police interceptor' progammes on tv I think they need to do a rethink on how that works, get those overweight boy racers out of their Subaru and Mitsubishi rally cars and back to something a bit more sensible, I'm sure there are ways with the use of ANPR to catch the crims without chasing them at high speed along the motorways and by roads. (and then giving them a slap on the wrist)

Gibbo2286 · Unread post by **Gibbo2286** » 27 Sep 2011, 11:18

What are your thoughts on this?

http://www.confused.com/car-insurance/a ... en-driving

handyman · Unread post by **handyman** » 27 Sep 2011, 11:23

Much as I dont like our snooping society, ANPR at fixed points, like some towns are experimenting with, is a way to track the offenders. Why not log them, check their address, turn up at night with a car transporter and whip the car down to the local crusher. Or is that too drastic?

Gibbo, you have my support (Yuk!) for increased police presence on the street. Bring back the old Noddy Bike, the LE Velo. That would scare all these boy racers witless!

H

handyman · Unread post by **handyman** » 27 Sep 2011, 11:32

Hi Gibbo, I had heard about this stupid use of technology. It would seem that the parents do not trust their off-springs to bear the consequences of their actions, forever attached to the apron strings. What a life!

The turkey from Ford, during an interview, intoned that it was a safety feature so that parents could protect their precious children, no regard given to the victims of any bad driving.

When we stop peoples expectations of being allowed to drive as a right, and only as a privilege, then we can start to educate drivers to do it properly. I'm sure Dickie agrees.

H

wheeler · Unread post by **wheeler** » 27 Sep 2011, 12:11

handyman wrote: Why not log them, check their address, turn up at night with a car transporter and whip the car down to the local crusher. Or is that too drastic?

Could be a bit drastic when it later turns out that it was a mistake on the insurance database

Gibbo2286 wrote:What are your thoughts on this?

http://www.confused.com/car-insurance/a ... en-driving

Similar technology has been on some citroen models for quite a while, different keys can memorise seat & mirror positions etc.

xmexclusive · Unread post by **xmexclusive** » 27 Sep 2011, 12:41

Best to do the do the car collection in broad daylight with a blaze of publicity. Flyers through the neighhbours doors inviting them to the public car crushing at a fixed time the next day.
Database errors?
There cannot be anything like that.
If it is a govenment sponsered database they never admit to being wrong.
DVLA is a prime example.

John

Gibbo2286 · Unread post by **Gibbo2286** » 27 Sep 2011, 12:50

xmexclusive wrote: If it is a govenment sponsered database they never admit to being wrong.
DVLA is a prime example. John

One of my motor trade mates had a car taken off him by the cops near the Severn Bridge because the ANPR picked it up, he was in overalls and of course not carrying documents but despite his insistance that he had a motor trade insurance they wouldn't back down and made him phone for a lift home.

DickieG · Unread post by **DickieG** » 27 Sep 2011, 16:03

Gibbo2286 wrote:One thing about policing Dickie, having watched a few of the 'police interceptor' progammes on tv I think they need to do a rethink on how that works, get those overweight boy racers out of their Subaru and Mitsubishi rally cars and back to something a bit more sensible, I'm sure there are ways with the use of ANPR to catch the crims without chasing them at high speed along the motorways and by roads. (and then giving them a slap on the wrist)

I'm not convinced of the need to those stupid rally cars as pursuit vehicles, especially when I've had the dubious honour of testing so called Police Class 1 drivers from certain county forces, TBH I find it quite scary that they are let loose in those with Police exemptions as the level of training undertaken by some forces leaves a lot to be desired. A BMW 525D is plenty quick enough for police use and handles like a dream, whoever sanctioned the buying of those cars needs to have their head tested, a total waste of money as the running costs of those cars are astronomical and I'm just talking of tyres and fuel. As for being a passenger in one on active service driven by someone trained by certain county forces, count me out, I value my life.

The subject of whether to pursue is a very emotive one due to the high risk of injury and death, unfortunately all too often an innocent member of public becomes the victim and the lunatic being pursued walks away without a scratch. However if there is a no pursuit policy anyone drink driving, carrying stolen goods or even a terrorist knows that if they put their foot down they will get away with whatever crime they are committing, so a difficult one really which has been the subject of countless debates for many years now.

As for knocking on the registered keepers door later, well nice theory but the reality is that scrotes don't register their cars and even if they do its not to home addresses which gives them all the time in the world to dispose of evidence.

handyman wrote:When we stop peoples expectations of being allowed to drive as a right, and only as a privilege, then we can start to educate drivers to do it properly. I'm sure Dickie agrees.

I couldn't agree more and a prime example is this case where the scumbag who has never passed a driving test was found to be driving recklessly and ended up killing his girlfriend. Unbelievably this was the second collision where he has killed someone yet he was only given ten years disqual, why was he not banned for life? What on earth does someone have to do and how many people is someone allowed to kill on the road through reckless driving before a judge says enough is enough, shocking

Unfortunately similar battles are being fought on a daily basis within the Police as for an officers suitability to drive, senior officers will spout all manner of so called robust road safety policies to the public yet almost every time a driver is suspended from driving by the Driving School after being identified as not up to standard we'll have one of their Governors ringing up complaining that need them to drive certain vehicles for "Operational" reasons. Unfortunately most very senior Police Officers haven't served on the front line for very long at all as they were all too busy feathering their own nest getting promotion so they don't have a clue as to what goes on out there and for the same reason haven't they done driving courses and been scared sh**less by a colleague on a course so they have very little understanding of how important a very high level of training is when it comes to pursuit driving. Laughably many senior Officers have tried to get a tick for "efficiency" in their promotion application by suggesting that the length of driving courses should be reduced, however when it comes to firearms training not one of them dares to make such a suggestion. Clearly they haven't done the maths on the amount of energy in a bullet and compared that with a 5 Series at 100MPH.

Compare how many people are killed by Police using guns each year and how many are killed in road traffic collisions,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

wheeler wrote:
handyman wrote: Why not log them, check their address, turn up at night with a car transporter and whip the car down to the local crusher. Or is that too drastic?
Could be a bit drastic when it later turns out that it was a mistake on the insurance database
Gibbo2286 wrote: One of my motor trade mates had a car taken off him by the cops near the Severn Bridge because the ANPR picked it up, he was in overalls and of course not carrying documents but despite his insistance that he had a motor trade insurance they wouldn't back down and made him phone for a lift home.

Yes it does happen, I know for a fact that very recently the MID wasn't accurate as not all insurance companies partook in the scheme (my wife works in the Police Control Room).

wheeler wrote:
Gibbo2286 wrote:What are your thoughts on this?

http://www.confused.com/car-insurance/a ... en-driving
Similar technology has been on some Citroën models for quite a while, different keys can memorise seat & mirror positions etc.

Technology to stop cars by remote access has been under research for a few years now as its clearly the safest way to stop pursuits taking place, however can you imagine the outcry of big brother? Hmm, I wonder how many relatives of collision victims will shout "Big Brother",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Unread post by **CitroJim** » 27 Sep 2011, 16:41

Very interesting read there Richard

On the subject of smart keys and stopping a naughty vehicle by remote control, that's all very well but the vast majority of young drivers starting out will have older, small cars to which this technology cannot apply. It'll be years before it's universal...

And as for remote access to a car, that's not really there yet either and likely won't be mainstream for very many years. Again a lot of the villains are running around in older cars and to stop say, a mechanically injected diesel from a distance would need the deployment of a rocket propelled grenade!

All very well in theory but in practice - that's a different matter...

The thought of bombarding the errant car with a strong RF field to disable and fry the ECU has been looked at but is fraught with huge difficulties as well, huge power is needed to overcome the very good screening around ECUs these days and you risk taking out the pursuit vehicle and any other innocents in the way, even people with pacemakers and the like...

And again, get a good old mechanically pumped diesel or a carb'd petrol motor and it'll be totally ineffective.... The best you can hope for is instant sterilisation of the occupants of the car. Thinking about it, that may not be such a bad option - no sprogs to carry on the family 'tradition'

DickieG · Unread post by **DickieG** » 27 Sep 2011, 16:55

I know the technology has been or is about to be fitted to certain vehicles in everyday use already as a few of my colleagues were involved in the testing of it a couple of years ago.

Unread post by **myglaren** » 27 Sep 2011, 17:22

I'm sure the Americans have the technology but how widespread it is I couldn't say - an embedded chip with a GPS transponder and immobiliser.

In the event of an accident or breakdown the car flags it's fault and location but also a stolen car can located be remotely disabled.