Hartford’s Execs Make Plea to End ‘Real Issue, Real Pain’ of Distracted Driving

By | December 16, 2016

  • December 16, 2016 at 10:34 am
    ExciteBiker says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 18
    Thumb down 1

    The states all need to step up and enact legislation banning use of handheld electronic devices while operating a motor vehicle. Or at the bare minimum they need to start aggressively enforcing existing distracted driving statutes. Anyone who drives while texting on a cell phone quite frankly does not deserve to have driving privileges.

    I also think vehicle manufacturers need to be held to account. Safety standards should include rigorous testing to ensure that the design of in-vehicle functions are not serving as a distraction. For example, climate control settings until recent years were nearly universal– a couple of dials for airflow, temperature and positioning. I’ve seen vehicles with absolutely byzantine digital climate control settings that serve as a major distraction when trying to adjust them. Vehicles also often come with a large touch-screen display in the dashboard which controls many of the in-cabin functions. These ought to be eliminated entirely.

    Every company, large and small, should immediately implement written distracted driving and cell phone policies if they haven’t already.

    Eyes on the road.

    • December 16, 2016 at 1:24 pm
      SWFL Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 1

      Agree with everything you and SacFlood have stated but we’ll never agree to pay for enough law enforcement to make a difference on this. And of course traffic cameras aren’t supported by the public so that’s not an option. Would like to know how the Harford’s AARP book performs and wonder if that’s part of their problem. Rate making for elderly drivers would seem to be much more dynamic now that there is more of them and they live longer. Plus, many seniors will not give up driving privileges until the 2nd or 3rd accident has happened.

    • December 16, 2016 at 2:01 pm
      agent2 says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 0

      Right on point ExciteBiker. 20 years ago you get in one car to the next they were almost identical in operation. Now there are so many differences and intricacies of function that IT IS a distraction to operate vehicle controls!

    • December 16, 2016 at 2:49 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 5
      Thumb down 2

      Correct Excite, but those cell addicts think they can multi task when they can’t. It is totally out of hand now. People sleep with their cell and wake up to check their texts and Facebook. Completely out of control. I think the insurance companies have not been aggressive enough on warnings about texting while driving. Perhaps a flyer on the front of a policy could be done warning about consequences of this dangerous activity.

  • December 16, 2016 at 10:58 am
    SacFlood says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 14
    Thumb down 0

    Agreed, ExciteBiker. Especially re handheld devices. It’s out of control. Also, how about complete stops, turn signals, lights on in the rain, seatbelts, tailgating; common sense & common courtesy.
    I know, you can’t fix stupid, selfish, or arrogant, but you can both legislate it, as well as enforce the hell out of it. Police, how about setting a good example, and putting on your headlights when it rains, and enforcing this CA law, especially with white, gray, silver, black, and other hard to see car colors in the rain.

  • December 16, 2016 at 2:54 pm
    Jim Holm says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 2
    Thumb down 0

    While I agree that distracted driving is a serious issue, The Hartford is being less than candid in suggesting it is at the heart of their problems.

    They write 75% of their personal auto through their AARP program. Are they really claiming that their AARP drivers are as distracted by cell phones as the younger drivers insured by Progressive and GEICO? Progressive is enjoying combined ratios about ten points better than The Hartford’s. GEICO appears to be in the same arena as Progressive.

    I was a Hartford Premier Agent two years ago. My agency’s loss ratio with them was much better than their loss ratio in our state. We were a very large agency for them. Through a series of very absurd management decisions they pushed us to a point where we had no choice but to ask for a mutual termination. Much of that business went to Travelers in our agency. Our loss ratio with Travelers this year is 43%. We will make them about $3 million in profit.

    Hartford mis-priced its AARP product and took a ham-fisted approach to solving the issue. For example — they decided to charge one rate for AARP through independent agents and another rate through AARP direct. That decision ended my desire to do business with them, it just took me a few months to react fully.

    it is my opinion that extremely poor management and too much reliance on AARP is a much more serious problem for The Hartford than distracted drivers.

    • December 19, 2016 at 10:00 am
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 0

      I believe if one looks at the loss ratio of any large company writing Personal Auto and deducted all the accidents caused by distracted driving due to cell use, they would all experience a good loss ratio.

      • December 19, 2016 at 11:54 am
        Ron says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 0

        Don’t forget to throw in accidents caused by speeding, disobeying traffic control devices, careless/reckless driving, unsafe lane changes and other driving behaviors that are illegal.

        We need to stop thinking that making a behavior illegal, or increasing the punishment, will stop said behavior.

        • December 20, 2016 at 2:28 pm
          mrbob says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 1
          Thumb down 0

          Could not agree with Ron more. There are already plenty of laws on the books that could be enforced regarding distracted driving we just as a society choose not to have the enforcement levels needed to keep the situation under control. Prime example from AZ is the Town of Paradise Valley vs City of Phoenix. In PV you see very little speeding, Phoenix on the other hand typical speed is 10-15 miles over posted. Why PV chooses to have more officers per capita and focuses efforts on traffic enforcement. Not blaming Phoenix PD for the situation as they have many budgetary constraints and hence less per capita officers to take care of the lesser crimes. I would assume the situation is the same in all larger cities.

  • December 17, 2016 at 6:57 am
    dday says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 1
    Thumb down 0

    All true about the distractions BUT the biggest obstacle is data company revenue. The issue of smart phone usage while driving does not equate to seat belts of the past – nor does it compare to the MADD drunk driving campaign – not even the shaming style anti-litter campaign of the 60s and 70s. And Here’s WHY:
    Because the Nation’s LARGEST Advertising Budgets are aimed at creating Constant Demand for Data Sharing.
    Imagine if the MADD drunk driving efforts were countered by the liquor industry spending billions to show young people happily imbibing around the clock – which includes behind the wheel.
    Simple psychology makes our smart phones irresistible because the many interactive experiences they offer are insidiously and intentionally designed to constantly reaffirm how Awesom we (think) are.
    They will have to be disabled in the auto. And overnight AT&T Verizon and Sprint would lose 30% of their revenue. That’s why it won’t happen without drastic efforts.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*