On Thursday, 2 July 2015 22:55:58 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 1 July 2015 22:59:03 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"Nightjar.me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 01/07/2015 21:13, Rod Speed wrote:
...
and is a major reason why vehicle insurance premiums are
significantly
higher for the under 25s. They simply don't have the same awareness
of
danger.

That one is very arguable and it could just as easily be
inexperience that is the main reason for the higher claims...

That is a separate premium weighting, which is applied to anybody who
has
been driving for less than one year, whatever their age.

But they don't necessarily get that good at driving in
a year on the question of avoiding having accidents.

They must do, insurance companies wouldn't get this wrong.

They have always got it wrong.

They've always managed to make a profit and that's what they are for.

In the past they didn't change
anything like the premiums for those under 25 that they should
have and even now charge much too much for the safest under
25 drivers, just because there is no way to work out who they
are with no claims history to use to work that out.

That's how it works.


In fact most people get much better at driving after the first hour.

BULL****. And I have taught a number of people to drive.

Why doesn't that suprise me. If you don't know how to drive and teh first few minutes of instruction tell you where the brake, accelarator and clutch are and how to use them then you're highly likely to be a better driver than before you knew what the pedals were for.



If you watch someone starting a car up and driving off for the first time
they
are likely to stall, not turn quick enough or too quick same with
breakaing
and accelerating, after an hour they're far better than they were.

But they are so distracted by that stuff that becomes automatic
with time that they are much more likely to have an accident
when something unexpected happens with the other traffic
like someone else doing something completely stupid.

More experinced drivers know that, which is one thing that makes them more experienced and better drivers.


Which doesn;t mean they are perfect driver after a year

In fact they are nothing like that, particularly if they are kids
who just drive a little locally like so many girls do and then
have to drive around in very heavy traffic in the business
center of a state or country capital etc.

So you agree then, the less you drive the worse you are likely to be at it in general.


any more than they'd be perfect drivers after 40 years.

Having fun thrashing that straw man ?

Think you missed the point there, hardly suprising.


http://www.brake.org.uk/news/15-fact...the-hard-facts

Why are young drivers more at risk?

Research shows that the combination of youth and
inexperience puts younger drivers at high risk.

What I said.

No it isn't this is what you said.


In fact most people get much better at driving after the first hour.

BULL****. And I have taught a number of people to drive.

You've claimed people don't get better the more they drive, or is that only when you teach them.



Their inexperience means they have less ability to spot hazards,

What I said.

nop, otherwise you'd have realised why kid drivers tend to have higher insurance premiums.


and their youth means they are particularly likely to take risks.

That's not necessarily true with the girls. The problem
with so many of them is that they are much too cautious.

sounds a bit sexist to me but no suprise you use "not necessarily true"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...volved-in.html

so cautious they crash into parked cars.





In this way, crash risk not only reduces over time with experience

What I said.

Unless you've taught them it seems.