So, the insurance black box monitors are here

I seriously doubt it will find people moderately speeding up to 120 are less accident prone because damn near everyone speeds so it will always be considered a factor. Insurance is in place to take on the risks in the first place so there has to be a reasonable limit on how granularly risk is defined. As others have said, everyone breaks the rules of the road in some way at some time. There is no such thing as a perfect driver. Despite the propaganda it's plainly obvious where this is going and I want no part of it.
 
Renboy said:
If this were the case, why not install a device that interrupts cell signals and has a built in breathalyzer? In my opinion, those cause more, and worse accidents than anyone driving through Brampton at 20km/h over the limit.
Click to expand...

I believe that cell-phone-jamming devices are illegal, but I'm not disagreeing with you!
 
油井緋色;2086455 said:
Why did they develop a black box instead of figuring out how to combat fraud?

I've paid around $10,000 for car insurance in the last 10 years and $6000 for my motorcycle in the last 3. That accounts to $16,000~ in total. I've had one accident that cost around $5000 to fix. Insurance has pocketed $11000~ and jacked up my rates (slightly).

...and yet somehow, insurance keeps going up because somehow people are making multi million dollar claims.
Click to expand...


You are a sample of one person. Grab a group of 10,000 people and compare the collective premiums paid to the claims made and it will tell a different story.
 
Apollo95 said:
i think the main issue is the speed limits, and what the police are enforcing.

when average traffic flows are generally 20-25kmh above the limits, that indicates in a 60 zone where everyone is doing 80-85... well then the limit should be 80. or on highways where majority are going 130-140 with the left lane left open because everyone is frightnened of making a pass and getting hit with a 50 over.... the limit should be 130.

the black box just doesn't make sense so long as the LAWS dont' make sense.

also, im confused how insurance can penalize for speeding when traffic flow itself (meaning EVERYONE - maybe aside from the corolla in the passing lane doing 10 under current limit) is speeding. basically we are being considered hazards for going with the whats right instead of the archaic speed limits.

speed doesn't kill. stupid kills. change enforcement to include "unsafe lane change", "restricting traffic flow - which i believe should be careless driving", or "not using mirrors", "making a right turn on major intersection when vehicles approaching" etc....

how can one respect laws that don't respect the people they are supposed to serve??
how do you follow laws that just don't apply?? yet there is the fear of penalty.

im not a crazy guy weaving in and out of traffic. maintained clean record for a decade. but i realzie at any moment i couldve been hit with a few minors or a major simply for driving like the majority of everyone else.

a bit of a rant... i do apologize angry9: :p

the black box just does not apply. who here actually does 60kmh in a 60 zone?? or 100-115 on highway??
frankly no passes would be made and there would be even worst traffic.

if that was the case, in a 60 limit zone, right lane should be doing 40-50 and left lane 60 just to allow for flow. and that just is not the case.
or on highway, right lane then should be 60-70, middle lane 80-90 so the left lane can pass at the 100kmh. doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

You are misinterpreting the intent of the devices -- it is not to detect when you are speeding and jack up your rates as a result. In fact, at this moment we aren't even interested in speed data (and I doubt that it will ever be predictive unless someone is crazy over the speed limit the majority of the time).

Some hypothetical examples of things we may be interested in:


  • Frequent acceleration and hard braking (as a proxy for tailgating)
  • Gathering the TRUE number of kms driven per year
  • The time when you typically drive (eg. we may find that more claims happen during a certain time of day, such as rush hour)
  • You may live in _________ but do most of your driving in _________. (eg. Are people living in Mississauga but commuting west to Kitchener better risks than people living in Mississauga but commuting east through the GTA?)
  • etc.

I'm not saying that any of these examples have any statistical significance, but I'd certainly like to look at questions like these.
 
Brian P said:
So, in other words, if you are approaching a traffic light that has just gone yellow, you are better off blasting through the yellow (which might turn red) than to slow down moderately quickly in order to make the stop (as required by law!) because it might involve slowing down more than 15 km/h per second.

Fail.
Click to expand...

It will have to be a pattern, not isolated incidents. If you drive like a normal defensive person, you won't be penalized. As a policyholder myself, I would be angry as well if the rating was stupid like that!
 
What about fraud? This **** will not stop fraud. I think that we should have camera like in Russia to be able to know what happened before and during the accident.
VifferFun: Are those people going to be stuck at 100km/h on the 401? It sounds like suicide to me.

EDIT: If you can read french:
http://affaires.lapresse.ca/economi...-auto-primes-reduites-grace-a-big-brother.php
For the anglo only, they say that excessive speed start at 118km/h on the freeway and surcharge will happen after that speed....for now.
On other articles found they say that they can charge you for each minute that you are going too fast, accelerating/braking too fast, you get the bill at the end of the month.
 
Last edited:
vince492 said:
What about fraud? This **** will not stop fraud. I think that we should have camera like in Russia to be able to know what happened before and during the accident.
VifferFun: Are those people going to be stuck at 100km/h on the 401? It sounds like suicide to me.

EDIT: If you can read french:
http://affaires.lapresse.ca/economi...-auto-primes-reduites-grace-a-big-brother.php
For the anglo only, they say that excessive speed start at 118km/h on the freeway and surcharge will happen after that speed....for now.
On other articles found they say that they can charge you for each minute that you are going too fast, accelerating/braking too fast, you get the bill at the end of the month.
Click to expand...

That's not the way we're doing it, and I'd be REALLY surprised if any insurer could get such a program to fly with the Ontario regulators. The data would be collected over the course of a year and then your renewal premium, one year later, will be adjusted based on your driving characteristics. What those characteristics are have yet to be determined (but speed isn't even on my top five). The program will be on a discount-only basis for at least a few years. The device results would simply become an additional rating variable just like any other in our algorithm (eg. age, claims history, territory, distance to work, etc.)
 
Roomie said:
Don't be fooled. There's no good intentions of insurance companies other than to make themselves richer. This is just another shot at doing it.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it be a lot easier for them to just raise rates then?
 
fastar1 said:
Wouldn't it be a lot easier for them to just raise rates then?
Click to expand...

Except that option is very difficult. I doubt going to the board with "but I want to buy my wife a Roller so I need to charge clients more" will get you an approved rate increase.
 
VifferFun said:
You are misinterpreting the intent of the devices -- it is not to detect when you are speeding and jack up your rates as a result. In fact, at this moment we aren't even interested in speed data (and I doubt that it will ever be predictive unless someone is crazy over the speed limit the majority of the time).

Some hypothetical examples of things we may be interested in:


  • Frequent acceleration and hard braking (as a proxy for tailgating)
  • Gathering the TRUE number of kms driven per year
  • The time when you typically drive (eg. we may find that more claims happen during a certain time of day, such as rush hour)
  • You may live in _________ but do most of your driving in _________. (eg. Are people living in Mississauga but commuting west to Kitchener better risks than people living in Mississauga but commuting east through the GTA?)
  • etc.

I'm not saying that any of these examples have any statistical significance, but I'd certainly like to look at questions like these.
Click to expand...

Thank you for clarifying. i had the wrong idea. so it's not speed based, but rather behaviour (accelerate/stop), location, time and km driven. interesting.
 
Roomie said:
I don't know if you've noticed but they've done nothing but go up for years.......
Click to expand...

So it's working. Why bother devise this elaborate scheme to drive up rates when they're driving up rates already?
 
VifferFun said:
You are misinterpreting the intent of the devices -- it is not to detect when you are speeding and jack up your rates as a result. In fact, at this moment we aren't even interested in speed data (and I doubt that it will ever be predictive unless someone is crazy over the speed limit the majority of the time).

Some hypothetical examples of things we may be interested in:


  • Frequent acceleration and hard braking (as a proxy for tailgating)
  • Gathering the TRUE number of kms driven per year
  • The time when you typically drive (eg. we may find that more claims happen during a certain time of day, such as rush hour)
  • You may live in _________ but do most of your driving in _________. (eg. Are people living in Mississauga but commuting west to Kitchener better risks than people living in Mississauga but commuting east through the GTA?)
  • etc.

I'm not saying that any of these examples have any statistical significance, but I'd certainly like to look at questions like these.
Click to expand...

There's no GPS info available from the OBDII system.
 
fastar1 said:
So it's working. Why bother devise this elaborate scheme to drive up rates when they're driving up rates already?
Click to expand...

One word. Greed. Insurance in this province is the biggest joke going. It's a shame someone can't jump in and tell these scammers that's enough. Insurance should be based on you individually. Not your demographic, where you live etc etc. This brilliant box idea is only to make them more money by finding every reason under the sun to charge you more for insurance.


Sent from my piss poor iPhone while sitting on my squidly gixxxxxxxxer sippin on kool aid
 
Roomie said:
One word. Greed. Insurance in this province is the biggest joke going. It's a shame someone can't jump in and tell these scammers that's enough. Insurance should be based on you individually. Not your demographic, where you live etc etc. This brilliant box idea is only to make them more money by finding every reason under the sun to charge you more for insurance.


Sent from my piss poor iPhone while sitting on my squidly gixxxxxxxxer sippin on kool aid
Click to expand...

If you base insurance on the individual instead of the group, how do you deal with the individual that hurts someone and has a $1,000,000 claim? Either you try to recoup the loss through their premiums (probably impossible), or you tell them they can never have insurance again (in which case the insurance company takes a huge loss). The only way insurance works is if you average the $1,000,000 claim over a group. If only 1 out of 1000 has a claim that large every 10 years, you only need to collect $1000 every 10 years from each person to pay for it, that is a reasonable amount of money.

If you really wany to be a group of 1, the only practical way (which isn't allowed in Ontario) would be to self-insure. If you are involved with something where someone gets hurt, expect to lose everything you have now or ever will have in the future, would you be willing to take that risk?

Personally, although I think current rates are too high, but I think the focus needs to be on the fraud aspect first. Until that becomes heavily enforced (ie. use proceeds of crime laws to take everything from everyone involved [and then deport in many cases]), insurance rates will continue to skyrocket.
 
I wonder how long it will take someone to pull a OBD2 module from the junk yard and wire a 12volt power supply to plug the black box into and leave it in the garage. At the very least I would look to add a switch inline so I could power the black box off when I choose.
 
Roomie said:
One word. Greed. Insurance in this province is the biggest joke going. It's a shame someone can't jump in and tell these scammers that's enough. Insurance should be based on you individually. Not your demographic, where you live etc etc. This brilliant box idea is only to make them more money by finding every reason under the sun to charge you more for insurance.


Sent from my piss poor iPhone while sitting on my squidly gixxxxxxxxer sippin on kool aid
Click to expand...

RSA is running 140 percent loss ratio so far this year due to Calgary and toronto flooding in particular. So maybe do a little research before being an expert. ?? Would you like to pay out $1.40 for every dollar you earn?
 
[/QUOTE]If you really wany to be a group of 1, the only practical way (which isn't allowed in Ontario) would be to self-insure. If you are involved with something where someone gets hurt, expect to lose everything you have now or ever will have in the future, would you be willing to take that risk?

Personally, although I think current rates are too high, but I think the focus needs to be on the fraud aspect first. .[/QUOTE]

Want to self insure ? Take a huge deductible and post that amount in account you can't touch so it's available when you have a claim. Fraud makes up a massive portion of claims , that is true
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom