On 08/07/2019 13:50, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:


usually wumin drivers I have found turn on their indicator and drive
into the side of you...I spend my life avoiding wummin drivers ..that is
why the statistics for wummin drivers are so good ....

I've never had an accident but see plenty in my rear view mirror!

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 08/07/2019 17:23, Brian Gaff wrote:
Oh I get the four letter expletives when out sweeping my cane and almost
get it in the spokes of a pavement peddler.
Brian



Most pavement bike riders behave as if they are blind themselves.

However these days the main nuisance for pedestrians is the number of
fat people who no longer have to walk because they can afford a mobility
scooter.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 09/07/2019 01:08, T i m wrote:
On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 22:04:23 +0100, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 08/07/2019 14:52, T i m wrote:
On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:50:14 +0100, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote:
snip

usually wumin drivers I have found turn on their indicator and drive
into the side of you...I spend my life avoiding wummin drivers ..that is
why the statistics for wummin drivers are so good ....

Except they are ... that's why their insurance premiums were generally
lower than for men (of the same age / experience / history /
profession).

How good were those statistics though?

Considering these people make a living from not seeming to carry any
risk themselves [1], pretty good?

They can't know everything though and I wonder what assumptions they make.

For example, I have a car and so does my wife. Both of us are insured
for both vehicles. The insurance companies have no way of knowing how
much each of us individually drives, where or when, only who is the main
driver of each and the total mileage for each.

In our case it actually equates to all the mileage in my car and almost
half the mileage in her car being me; all the rush hour driving being
me; and all the complex and unfamiliar places being me, but their data
would likely show a percentage for each or all my car's mileage against
me and all her car's against her. Whatever way they do it, it is likely
to be seriously overestimating her mileage and risk factors and
seriously underestimating mine.

If many couples are like this (and most that I know are), then it would
skew the data quite badly, leading to the men appearing to be far more
risky, when actually we are simply taking on a lot of the driving that
the women are actually insured for, but are not doing.

In our case they perceive her as the "safer driver" as a woman, despite
my having only two claims, both non-fault, in around 750,000 miles in 34
years and her having two non-fault and one 50/50 claim (should have been
non-fault, but the other driver lied) in less than 20,000 miles in 17 years!

Now I don't mind paying more as I do more miles, but I do object to
being considered more of a risk per mile as well!

In all the families and couples I
know the man tends to drive much further for work, drive at the busiest
times and during the night and do virtually all the driving when both of
them are in the car.

As it is here.

If men and women were being genuinely compared on
like-for-like mileage, times, locations, etc. I'm sure the accident
figures would be much more the same.

But as mentioned elsewhere, with insurance Co's it also comes down to
the cost (to them) of the loss and the suggestion is that women's
accidents are generally lighter and so cheaper (they don't think they
are racing drivers and more likely to scrape your car than write it
off). shrug

Cheers, T i m


[1] Our car was written of by a hit-and-run (slow articulated truck)
when parked at night and we were asleep in bed. Because we were fully
Comp they paid up, but it went down as a 'blame claim' because there
wasn't another part to claim against? Why should we have to carry any
blame? I didn't claim off them the years I wasn't involved in an
accident (Increased NCB isn't a claim). ;-)

My wife's was hit by a bus - there were parked cars on her side of the
road, so she stopped to let him through. He drove past the whole row of
parked cars and then hit her. She was shocked, unable to get out of the
driver's door until he moved the bus and unable to sensibly get out of
the other side as she was 8 months pregnant. The bus driver then claimed
that she was moving and on the wrong side of the road. The insurance
companies went 50/50.

My parents' cars were hit three times outside their house (on a quiet
residential road). The first was a retired neighbour, taking medication
and not supposed to drive, who drove down the wrong side of the road;
the second was another neighbour who was an unaccompanied learner (he
should have known better, he was in his 50s); the third was a milk-float
turning in too sharply when passing the car - he shouldn't have been
driving either, he was covering his brother's round and wasn't insured
for it!

SteveW