Don’t think for a minute this is going to reduce the income of insurance companies so we all save money. If they don’t get it from all the drivers regardless of mileage they will just adjust rates and rearrange who does the paying. Washington already has rating that goes by estimated annual mileage and most companies already give a break to those who drive under 5000 miles per year. Putting in odometer monitoring requirements just adds to the cost of administration and likely the cost of all insurance. And what about those trials that put black boxes put into cars to verify where and how much you drive. I think folks should think about what comes next when we open this door and do we really want to go there?
Agree that concept is a phony one and dangerous regarding control and privacy issues. Regulation measures would be dramatic; drove 5001 miles this year-what then with coverage for 5000 miles. Surcharge? Automatic coverage for the extra mile? Sounds like a rent a car program that has no real value.
This is all about getting people out of their cars. There is an agenda behind this and it has nothing to do about insurance per se. There are people who believe we should not be taking long road trips as it enlarges our “foot print” and spoils the earth. But beyond all of this hysteria, globalists believe people are more easily controlled when they are in tight cities and go no where. Some insurance companies have bought into this garbage because they want to be an insider.
But wait a minute. Why should the feds have anything to say about what type of rating system a private insurance company wants to initiate. Again, what I said in paragraph #1 is the answer to that too.
The fairest way is for Mr Kreidler to require the insurance companies to charge the same for everyone, which is zero dollars. Those rich insurance companies will still make huge profits from all the investment income.
Why is this any different than the way some commercial insurance is done today, where the initial rate is based on projected payroll or headcount, etc and then at the end of the term, the actual information is used to “audit” and settle up on additional premium owed or due back?
If we know the core rating elements of Auto insurance, and one of them is miles driven (i.e. exposure), then why is this not a great idea? I think there are lots more pertinent rating attributes that could be included as well to allow people to control their costs (not driving above a certain speed, not driving between midnight and 6am, hard braking habits, quick acceleration habits, lots of left turns, et al).
Today, all drivers are rated using general types of attributes (gender, age, miles driven, vehicle info like YR, how the vehicle is used) and beyond getting as many discounts as you can and having a clean MVR report and minimal/no accidents, your rate is pretty much like everyone else in your demographic.
But, we all know people who are very safe drivers (routine acceleration, safe distance between cars, slow to brake, drive the speed limit, slow down on wet roads, drive during non rush hour or not after 11pm, etc). The things, they rarely have “at fault” accidents and rarely have violations PLUS, we want to buy their car when they sell it!
Don’t think for a minute this is going to reduce the income of insurance companies so we all save money. If they don’t get it from all the drivers regardless of mileage they will just adjust rates and rearrange who does the paying. Washington already has rating that goes by estimated annual mileage and most companies already give a break to those who drive under 5000 miles per year. Putting in odometer monitoring requirements just adds to the cost of administration and likely the cost of all insurance. And what about those trials that put black boxes put into cars to verify where and how much you drive. I think folks should think about what comes next when we open this door and do we really want to go there?
Agree that concept is a phony one and dangerous regarding control and privacy issues. Regulation measures would be dramatic; drove 5001 miles this year-what then with coverage for 5000 miles. Surcharge? Automatic coverage for the extra mile? Sounds like a rent a car program that has no real value.
Big Brother is always watching!!!! That’s what this is coming too!!!
This is all about getting people out of their cars. There is an agenda behind this and it has nothing to do about insurance per se. There are people who believe we should not be taking long road trips as it enlarges our “foot print” and spoils the earth. But beyond all of this hysteria, globalists believe people are more easily controlled when they are in tight cities and go no where. Some insurance companies have bought into this garbage because they want to be an insider.
But wait a minute. Why should the feds have anything to say about what type of rating system a private insurance company wants to initiate. Again, what I said in paragraph #1 is the answer to that too.
The fairest way is for Mr Kreidler to require the insurance companies to charge the same for everyone, which is zero dollars. Those rich insurance companies will still make huge profits from all the investment income.
Why is this any different than the way some commercial insurance is done today, where the initial rate is based on projected payroll or headcount, etc and then at the end of the term, the actual information is used to “audit” and settle up on additional premium owed or due back?
If we know the core rating elements of Auto insurance, and one of them is miles driven (i.e. exposure), then why is this not a great idea? I think there are lots more pertinent rating attributes that could be included as well to allow people to control their costs (not driving above a certain speed, not driving between midnight and 6am, hard braking habits, quick acceleration habits, lots of left turns, et al).
Today, all drivers are rated using general types of attributes (gender, age, miles driven, vehicle info like YR, how the vehicle is used) and beyond getting as many discounts as you can and having a clean MVR report and minimal/no accidents, your rate is pretty much like everyone else in your demographic.
But, we all know people who are very safe drivers (routine acceleration, safe distance between cars, slow to brake, drive the speed limit, slow down on wet roads, drive during non rush hour or not after 11pm, etc). The things, they rarely have “at fault” accidents and rarely have violations PLUS, we want to buy their car when they sell it!