New research: More youngsters riding rather than driving

phreak

Came across some new research today showing that youngsters are increasingly choosing to either not have a car or to not drive the one they have, with cycling and public transport use rising as a result.

Summary here or full report here

Gotta be a positive sign.

rick_chasey

I'd suggest the reasons may be because cars are becoming more expensive (especially for young people) to run, and youngsters are getting more skint by the day.

phreak

Dare say petrol costs play a part as well, but if it gets people onto bikes then it's still a good thing.

optimisticbiker

Rick Chasey wrote:

I'd suggest the reasons may be because cars are becoming more expensive (especially for young people) to run, and youngsters are getting more skint by the day.

Especially as many don't realise just how much the car is costing them. My son's 4y old Aygo costs him £4 a day (insurance and maintenance and depreciation, the tax is only £20pa) just to sit there while he spends £8 on PT getting into work..... he was amazed... however at least he has no interest in selling it and buying a motorbike... sadly he can't ride a proper bicycle, he never learnt and has no interest in starting now despite my best efforts

roger_merriman

Rick Chasey wrote:

I'd suggest the reasons may be because cars are becoming more expensive (especially for young people) to run, and youngsters are getting more skint by the day.

Indeed my total car costs are less than the quotes for some 18 year olds.

okgo

Its not the fuel, or the cost of tax or anything like that, its the cost of insurance, its totally out of hand.

My car costs me a fortune and I barely drive it! Its basically used to driving to races.

suzyb

Rick Chasey wrote:

I'd suggest the reasons may be because cars are becoming more expensive (especially for young people) to run, and youngsters are getting more skint by the day.

I'd agree.

Almost 140p for a litre of petrol today Plus my car's MOT will be due end of this month, then insurance in another couple which will have gone up god knows how much.

hmm I wonder whether the parents would be up for going back to a 1 car household, now they're both retired and have their free bus pass.

rick_chasey

okgo wrote:

Its not the fuel, or the cost of tax or anything like that, its the cost of insurance, its totally out of hand.

My car costs me a fortune and I barely drive it! Its basically used to driving to races.

Hence my catch all 'cost to run'

:P

cyclingprop

OptimisticBiker wrote:

sadly he can't ride a proper bicycle, he never learnt and has no interest in starting now despite my best efforts

Disappointed in you...

okgo

Yeh I know. But insurance is the most prohibitive part IMO, its just silly.

u05harrisb

im 18 and although alot of my friends have got themselfs cars mom and dad are paying for them, even if it was cheap i rather ride my bike anyway. but for me to get a old 106 and insure it the insureance alone was going to be about £5000! my cheapest quote we could get was £3500 and most expensive was just shy of £6000! so even if it was cheap i wouldnt bother! most use it for a 4-5 mile trip to school, so i use buses or the bike depending on what i feel like because it makes sense.
Ben

optimisticbiker

cyclingprop wrote:

OptimisticBiker wrote:

sadly he can't ride a proper bicycle, he never learnt and has no interest in starting now despite my best efforts

Disappointed in you...

Not through want of trying.... but I haven't given up yet...the elder two are quite capable riders. Even Mrs OB has suggested she might try and learn... I showed her SimonAH's pedicab as an option but she said she wouldn't be seen dead riding that

SimonAH

Oh dear...(I must try harder) :-D I could paint it pink and add a bud vase to the 'bars if that would increase feminine appeal?

Most of the cost increases applied to car insurance are due to the litigious culture endengered by the changing of the law to allow lawyers to advertise, and the no-win no-fee culture that came in (if memory serves) under Blair (coincidinky that Cherie is in law??). Personally, alongside the shedding of the gold standard, I reckon this was the single most culturally damaging political change to the British system in modern times - but it appears almost unregarded? Weird.

DonDaddyD

There is no way I'm paying £3,500 insurance for a car for my child. No way. They won't be going on my insurance either. It would make sense that children are finding alternate methods of transport. It's a good thing.

rick_chasey

DonDaddyD wrote:

There is no way I'm paying £3,500 insurance for a car for my child. No way. They won't be going on my insurance either. It would make sense that children are finding alternate methods of transport. It's a good thing.

Can someone please make a scrap book of all the these DDD is sure he won't be doing for his kid, and then send it on when the kid is older?

optimisticbiker

SimonAH wrote:

Oh dear...(I must try harder) :-D I could paint it pink and add a bud vase to the 'bars if that would increase feminine appeal?

It was before you did it up though

SimonAH wrote:

Most of the cost increases applied to car insurance are due to the litigious culture endengered by the changing of the law to allow lawyers to advertise, and the no-win no-fee culture that came in (if memory serves) under Blair (coincidinky that Cherie is in law??). Personally, alongside the shedding of the gold standard, I reckon this was the single most culturally damaging political change to the British system in modern times - but it appears almost unregarded? Weird.

I think some of the increase is due to apathy on the part of many. If they can get away with it they will... Every year I argue with Admiral on the multicar policy to bring it down to their 'online for new users price' and I usually do and beat other companies. This year the insurance on my youngest's Aygo was £1000, down from £1500 last year and up from £1200 the year before (because he passed his test so therefore was a bigger risk). I've never been quoted more than £1800 for insurance on my children's cars and that with them as the main driver and me and Mrs OB as named drivers. And thats on a 2y old Toyota Yaris, then a brand new one and now the Aygo. While I've heard of these ridiculous prices on insurance for youngster's neither I nor my friends have encountered them, and we live in a high insurance area in NW London. So other factors must come into play...

bigmat

SimonAH wrote:

Oh dear...(I must try harder) :-D I could paint it pink and add a bud vase to the 'bars if that would increase feminine appeal?

Most of the cost increases applied to car insurance are due to the litigious culture endengered by the changing of the law to allow lawyers to advertise, and the no-win no-fee culture that came in (if memory serves) under Blair (coincidinky that Cherie is in law??). Personally, alongside the shedding of the gold standard, I reckon this was the single most culturally damaging political change to the British system in modern times - but it appears almost unregarded? Weird.

I don't think Cherie specialises in RTA's to be honest. I've wondered for years how premiums can be so low - I'd say I'm anaverage driver, don't do many miles, fairly cautious. I'm pretty sure that I've had more in payouts than I've paid in premiums over the years (or not far off anyway). Therefore I'm not surprised to see quotes going through the roof - seems a little unfair (and not in the interests of social mobility) that the young are targetted as much as they are, but I guess it serves them right for driving like nobs! What we may end up with is greater use of devices that limit speeds, tachometers etc for certain classes of motorists to enable them to get acceptable quotes. I've seen this already and its probably not a bad thing. Of course, anybody driving without insurance should have the book thrown at them as well.

t.m.h.n.e.t

My premium this year (TPFT+DOC extension) cost me £10 less than what my car did to buy last January so I'm finally reaping a reward????? There is no PT to where I work either so it's drive,get a lift or a hefty-ish commute.

I could understand it if I was 17 and a "bit of a lad" but I'm quite a few years beyond that. It's understandable why cycling is growing as a whole.

SimonAH

In some American states where distances are huge and therefore car licences are given at 16 they have additional legislation that says that a driver under the age of 20 (if memory serves) may take no passengers under the age of 30 unless there is at least one other passenger over the age of 30 for the first couple of years after receiving their licence.

This I consider eminently sensible as the vast majority of young driver accidents are caused by filling the car with mates and then showing off. By the time you are allowed to have peers in the car you've got a couple of years of driving experience under your belt and are behaving far more sensibly behind the wheel - it slashes the accident (and of course the fatality) statistics.

Must make for a few fairly kinky situations when it comes to dating though.. :oops:

mouth

If use of public transport is increasing then maybe it's time people (parents NOT schools) taught these young PT users some manners and how to use a bus properly.

cyclingprop

And some of the drivers...

Initialised

cyclingprop wrote:

OptimisticBiker wrote:

sadly he can't ride a proper bicycle, he never learnt and has no interest in starting now despite my best efforts

Disappointed in you...

You fail as a cyclist and a parent in one fell swoop.

Seriously, was it a rebellious thing or did you not try hard enough or maybe pushed too hard?

Back OT sold the second car, saved £3000 per year in upkeep etc... sadly most of this will be absorbed by inflation.

daniel_b

Very interesting topic.

I insured my first car, a hearing aid beige Metro City X, which was handed down from my grandparents, the value at the time was about £1200, and it cost me £580 to insure, TPF&T only - I was 20 at the time, so probably not as high risk as a 17 year old in the eyes of the insurance companies.

If I pop that into an inflation calculator, that comes out at around £1000 in todays money, which makes me think the amounts being touted above for first time insurance are about right.

I saw a laughable item on the local news a few months ago about the outrage of 'kids' learning to drive, and then not being able to afford, or struggling to pay the insurance on their cars - the one they showed had a Peugeot 206, with aftermarket alloys - are these people stupid or what?

When you have no NCB, you get the cheapest, and slowest car you possibly can, and you leave it BOG standard.

Once I had my 1 years, then I made some changes, and progressed onto a sportier car once the Metro had died - engine leaking oil, an A series engine shocker there for you.

Slightly silly thing is, for the last 2 years we have had 3 cars, and neither myself or my gf use one to get to work!

Of course now i am considerably older, sadly, the insurance is on average somewhere in the region of £220 per car, so not extortionate by any means.

We have just been given another estate car (giving the current one to my brother), but this time a more thirsty one, so I am getting that converted to LPG later this month, and have also decided that it is time to move my beloved 2nd car on (As it gets so little use), leaving us with just two.

A few years ago it would not even have crossed my mind to convert a car to LPG, but on a car averagring 28mpg, and petrol going up to £7 a gallon soon, it's now high on my priorities list.

To return to the topic, I think it's a very good thing IF more young people are turning to bikes as a proper source of transport, not only is it less cars on the road, and better health wise, you would think it will make them better and more aware, as well as cyclist aware, drivers in the future.

TheStone

Bloke I work with paid over 4k to insure his 17 year old son!
I suggested a bike or public transport, but apparently he doesn't like cycling and the bus is only once an hour.

Madness!

rick_chasey

TheStone wrote:

Bloke I work with paid over 4k to insure his 17 year old son!
I suggested a bike or public transport, but apparently he doesn't like cycling and the bus is only once an hour.

Madness!

It is.

If I wanted to see a friend I had two choices. Either cycle or don't go.

If I asked if I could have a lift, it would go like this:

"Mum, can you take me? It's wind force 9 and it's hailing sideways"

"why, are you ill?"

"yes"

"then you can't go"

"fine, I'm not ill"

"then you can cycle".


:roll:

DonDaddyD

In inner city London some parents justify the cost of insuring their childs car by stating that at least they know their child can get home safely and not have to endure public transport or walk home on streets that may not be as safe as they should or used to be.

A plausible rationale I think.

ETA: Same reasoning why young teenagers have mobile phones paid for by Mum and Dad. Yes it's so they can contact their friends but also because Mum and Dad want to have the ability to contact the child and for the child to be able to contact them should the need arise. So they suffer the contract/PAYG cost.

rick_chasey

DonDaddyD wrote:

In inner city London some parents justify the cost of insuring their childs car by stating that at least they know their child can get home safely and not have to endure public transport or walk home on streets that may not be as safe as they should or used to be.

A plausible rationale I think.

What dangers are there on public transport? (genuine question)

phreak

Rick Chasey wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

In inner city London some parents justify the cost of insuring their childs car by stating that at least they know their child can get home safely and not have to endure public transport or walk home on streets that may not be as safe as they should or used to be.

A plausible rationale I think.

What dangers are there on public transport? (genuine question)

Indeed. Buses are bloody slow but I've never felt unsafe on a London bus. Trains/tubes/DLR are obviously faster/dearer but no less safe. I'm inclined to think that the apparent risk to safety in London is over-egged.

DonDaddyD

Rick Chasey wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

In inner city London some parents justify the cost of insuring their childs car by stating that at least they know their child can get home safely and not have to endure public transport or walk home on streets that may not be as safe as they should or used to be.

A plausible rationale I think.

What dangers are there on public transport? (genuine question)

It's about removing the potential for encountering dangerous situations.

It has been know for fights and other things to happen on public transport. Sometimes the journey home is more dangerous than the club/party/thing you attend.

daviesee

DonDaddyD wrote:

It has been know for fights and other things to happen on public transport. Sometimes the journey home is more dangerous than the club/party/thing you attend.

Really?
It has been known for people to get hurt in car accidents.
If you/they are that concerned, stay indoors for the rest of your/their life. It's a bad world out there.....

Kieran_Burns

daviesee wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

It has been know for fights and other things to happen on public transport. Sometimes the journey home is more dangerous than the club/party/thing you attend.

Really?
It has been known for people to get hurt in car accidents.
If you/they are that concerned, stay indoors for the rest of your/their life. It's a bad world out there.....

but most accidents happen in the home.

Stand in the open doorway. It's the only way to be sure.