School Bullies and 4x4s

nortones2

I'm not sure I get your point LLB. Tesco are underwritten by UKI, which is owned by RBS, which also owns Churchill, Direct Line, Privelege etc. All insurers use both personal and vehicle data - what is unique about Tesco (fronting for UKI)?

linfordlunchbox

You tell me Nortones ?

If they all share the same data, they would all logically come to the same conclusions when offering quotes - they don't !

linfordlunchbox

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by ScumOfTheRoad</i>

Linford, I've just mentioned your name on another thread here. One that you started actually.

I see that you're getting a bit of stick here - and are giving some back. Good for you.
And everyone, remember that this is just an online cycling forum.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I'm like a dog at the fair SOTR [;)]

Funny thing is that I only really consider the 4x4 as transport when the others are either not practical, available or cheaper to use. In the pecking order of preference it is usually :-

1)Foot
2)Motorcycle
3)Cycle
4)Corsa (my daughters)
5)4x4


I had to use the 4x4 last night as we have run out of hay for the animals, and I couldn't carry a couple of bales on the cycle, motorcycle or the mile and a half on foot, and as it makes such a mess of the car (anyone want to come and clean it now ? ), I didn't want to stick it in the daughters corsa (oops, there goes another anecdote AC , I must stop using these real life experiences in my posts [;)])

---

"I'd clean my car with a baby elephant - if I had a baby elephant !"

nortones2

But varying the quotes doesn't invalidate the shared data. If Churchill state that certain vehicles are 25% more risky, then that remains the case unless they are fibbing. The quoted price may well depend on the commercial approach taken: perhaps they see some advantage in chopping up the market, as for instance Privilege look for low risk/safe drivers. For you, maybe NFU would specialise in working 4x4's - where I expect the risk is lower than for the aspirational 4x4 market.

linfordlunchbox

Realistically, due to the nature of most of my use (towing), I'd say that I like most people who tow heavy loads represent a greater danger statistically due to the increase in stopping distances which I have to afford, than an urban only use vehicle .

ACcp

Linf, I've worked in industries that use scoring (a technique that takes customer demographics and data, and uses it to predict a specific outcome (e.g. likely to crash)) for umpteen years now. That's why I know that personal experience is useful, but only so much in setting things like credit rules, aprs, premiums, credit limits, whether to upgrade a mobile phone or not and umpteen other things. That's why I believe the stats that 4x4 owners are riskier than many other groups of cars.

Oh and by the way I have a Prius that has neven been near London. Currently I have a three and a half hour commute by bike and train that would take two hours by car (only do it once a week). I've not done it by car yet, even in the Prius. That's just personal though - which is pretty worthless in a debate about the whole environment. Which is why it is best to ignore your trips to fetch hay when debating the merits of 4x4s.

Alas there may come a time when your flood plain is truly flooded, and you don't need to worry about hay at all at all.


I don't eat newly created species of marine life, or even newly discovered species of marine life for that matter, but if I did eat any sort of marine life, I would use this guide: -www.fishonline.org/information/MCSPocket_Good_Fish_Guide.pdf