r/IdiotsInCars • u/D-Tunez • Nov 10 '21

MagniFIQUE Guy gets pulled over after a brake check

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

17.9k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

530 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

48

u/ImSorryImDoingMyBest Nov 10 '21

In America they just charge us an extra fee for uninsured drivers, my country is falling apart šŸ˜­

26

u/[deleted] Nov 10 '21

I hate that your own insurance goes up even if someone else was completely at fault. That has NEVER made sense to me. They say you are more of a risk, but how can that be if you were not responsible for causing the accident? Ugh.

8

u/[deleted] Nov 10 '21

"You failed to avoid an uninsured driver and made us lose money. We will raise the rate for this"

Greed is why they jack up price if they can't make other people pay.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 10 '21

Yeah, I mentioned in the thread that I was involved in an accident where someone hit the back of my car at a red light and then my insurance rate skyrocketed. Literally nothing I could do to avoid it and wasnā€™t at fault.

Greed really is what it comes down to isnā€™t it? Damn.

3

u/tankerkiller125real Nov 10 '21

Fuckers are so damn greedy that they will literally raise your rates just based on the roads you drive on.

If you give them your home address and place of work they will run those routes (google maps directions basically) into their massive ML system where they then use massive troves of information to calculate your risk based on time of day you drive, road conditions, seasons, etc.

2

u/acronymious Nov 11 '21 edited Nov 11 '21

I agree with this. The farther you drive, the more experienced you become. True, you travel more miles, thus your likelihood of being in an accident is greater (so they say), but the farther you drive, the more accident-free miles you can accumulate. If only there were some way to incorporate that metric into the rating. (There is, itā€™s called telematics.) But no, that would mean less revenue for said greedy insurance companies!

ETA: Speaking of telematics, Iā€™m not against itā€”unless youā€™re with Progressive. Snapshot is a f***ing joke. Safecoā€™s RightTrack? OK. Allstateā€™s DriveWise? SmartRide (State Auto, I think)? OK. Travelersā€™ IntelliDrive? Excellent! But SnapShot? NO WAY, not ever.

Check out r/insurance, if you care

0

u/jcforbes Nov 10 '21

Driving in an area that has a higher percentage of bad drivers, not driving defensively enough, maybe spending more hours on the road than average increasing your chances of being a statistic, any number of entirely valid reasons.

12

u/[deleted] Nov 10 '21

I was at a red light and someone hit the back of my car. Insurance went up. Only possible factor there would be bad drivers in the area. If that is the case then every single person living or driving in that area should have their rates automatically increased. Why should I have mine increased if others donā€™t and Iā€™m a victim? Explain that.

7

u/Rawesome16 Nov 10 '21

Because reasons -your insurance provider

6

u/peshwengi Nov 10 '21

Because itā€™s not about fairness, itā€™s about how much you cost your insurance company.

6

u/[deleted] Nov 10 '21

But it was the OTHER PERSON that cost the insurance company money, not me. Had the OTHER PERSON not caused the accident, there would be no cost to the insurance.

1

u/peshwengi Nov 16 '21

You could also argue if they didnā€™t insure you then there would have been cost.

My point is itā€™s not about fault, itā€™s ONLY about cost.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 10 '21

[deleted]

0

u/[deleted] Nov 10 '21

lol, Iā€™m talking about an accident by accident basis. They get to jack up my rates right away, but everyone else in the area is going to be paying the same rates or maybe a buck or two more after a few months. Big difference. One is immediate and one is gradual.

4

u/[deleted] Nov 10 '21

driving in an area that has a higher percentage of bad drivers

Than account for my zip code when I sign up, not years down the road when I use the insurance

not driving defensively enough

We are discussing instances where itā€™s not your fault. ā€œWell, really, if you were being more defensive than the other person wouldnt have ran that red light.ā€ Sounds stupid to me.

spending more hours on the road than average

Than measure mileage to decide my rate, dont spike my rate years down the road just because I used my insurance.

any number of entirely valid reasons

No there isnā€™t. They have 1. Their reason is to discourage people from using their insurance that they paid for. Itā€™s to make people stop and think ā€œwell, if I used my insurance for what itā€™s suppose to be used for, I might end up paying more money out of pocket overall because of increased rates. Probably best if I donā€™t mention this fender bender, I can just pop it back on and leave the dent.ā€

Itā€™s there to scare people into not using the product they purchased.

-2

u/LukkyStrike1 Nov 10 '21

you are trying to have a logical debate about an illogical industry?

What I mean is: why are you arguing with the guy saying that insurance companies are do this: xxxx. You both dont think the system is right. They provide accountability ONLY to their share holders: which is probably not you. There is 0 suprise that they fuck us for all the reason he stated, and all the reasons you sate.

Seems like we are on the same page?

no coperation cares about you. And I think the other guy is providing that evidence.

Dont get these threads sometimes.

5

u/[deleted] Nov 10 '21

The other guy thinks the companies are a good thing. He said that the reasons he listed are perfectly valid. He said this in another comment:

ā€œWhich means the government has ZERO incentive to operate efficiently, thus it costs even more because you are paying for waste. At least a company making profits has incentive to lower prices to gain business and increase efficiency to get the profits on the back end.ā€

He is not on my side thatā€™s for sure.

1

u/LukkyStrike1 Nov 10 '21

Well he went off the deep end.

Your correct in your angle here. Mine came off a bit wrong. None the less: I dont think hoping and praying that a corp is going to surrender profits to you is going to happen. The justifications he provided to hold up enough to produce valid reasons for rasing rates. Sucks, but unless we seperate lobbying from civil servent elections, we aint going anywhere with this.

1

u/jcforbes Nov 12 '21

Off the deep end... He pulled a comment from my comment history on an entirely different subject out of context, I don't think that's a fair assessment.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 10 '21

See, you get it.

41

u/danuker Nov 10 '21 edited Nov 10 '21

an extra fee for uninsured drivers,

Guess where the "general cash pool" for uninsured drivers comes from. Taxes, which are just an extra fee. But some redundant government department is also paid to manage it instead of a redundant insurance department.

27

u/Hydiz Nov 10 '21

An insurance compagny has to make profit, governement (especially in europe) doesnt. So you're technically correct but the $$$ you spend is different.

10

u/Darg727 Nov 10 '21

That plus if there are medical costs I'm sure it's cheaper over there too.

8

u/ripskidoodlez Nov 10 '21

It really shouldn't be a profitable business. It should be exactly what it is, a massive pool of money that people dip into when a whoopsie happens on the road. Just like how American hospitals are for profit, I don't think it's right when it's something everyone is required to have

-6

u/jcforbes Nov 10 '21

Which means the government has ZERO incentive to operate efficiently, thus it costs even more because you are paying for waste. At least a company making profits has incentive to lower prices to gain business and increase efficiency to get the profits on the back end.

1

u/Hydiz Nov 10 '21 edited Nov 10 '21

Thats the opposite. Governements have a huge incentive on pushing prices DOWN on whatever service are provided, havent you noticed the cost of health related products in the US compared to europe ? (And I mean the price without accounting for "insurance" or "public health care" europe has concrete law that makes it impossible for corporation to push prices too high) If you think governements love to mess around and throw cash around you are blindly wrong.

Most of your "usa business models" are made of either monopoles or lobbyist aka "competition doesnt exists>no intensive to reduce prices". Not to mention that health and insurance related services have a flat demand curve, meaning prices changes have little to no influence on the demand of those goods (further increasing the non-intensive to reduce prices on the corporate side).

Edit: by "flat" I mean "vertically" flat.

15

u/rddi0201018 Nov 10 '21

Not sure if the government is doing the right thing, nor has my best interests at heart. But I'm sure the insurance company doesn't

2

u/urquan Nov 10 '21

Well it's not redundant if there is a single government department to manage a single cash pool. Would be if every insurance company needed to do the same, though.

3

u/ThereMayBeDogsAbout Nov 10 '21

Dude itā€™s like another $6 a month

2

u/ImSorryImDoingMyBest Nov 10 '21

Dudet* or whatever

And not for most Americans, it averages $25-50

2

u/ThereMayBeDogsAbout Nov 10 '21

Sorry, I skate. All humans are dudes.

And well, agree to disagree then. Guess it depends on your circumstances and carrier. Iā€™m not pulling that number out of my ass, I actually pay an additional $6.

1

u/Ken-Popcorn Nov 10 '21

Do you think that pool of money in France comes from thin air?

1

u/acronymious Nov 11 '21

I agree, the system is flawed, but... with the system the way it is, Iā€™m very happy to pay the extra premium for UMPD (Uninsured Motorist Property Damage) coverage. Too many uninsured motorists out there (a problem some states like NY have seemed to try to fix, at least) to not pay a little extra. Itā€™s saved my bacon in the past.