'Crash for cash' scam concerns leads number of car drivers using dash cams to double in a year

[micky moo]

Article on dashcams in the Daily Mail (London). The author predicts that dashcams will be a stocking-filling this Christmas. Unfortunately the article relies on old reviews of dashcams dating back two or even three years.
------------------

'Crash for cash' scam concerns leads number of car drivers using dash cams to double in a year
By Rob Hull For Thisismoney.co.uk
Published: 14:31, 12 October 2015 | Updated: 15:08, 12 October 2015

• One in five in accidents have unsettled claims due to lack of evidence
• Almost a quarter say one of the devices would improve their driving
• insurers offering up to 12.5% discount if you have a dash cam fitted

Twice as many motorists are using dash cams to record their journeys on UK roads to prove their innocence in disputes over accidents, according to new research.

A study by RAC suggests 2.9 million road users now have a dash cam fitted, while research from Garmin says 52 per cent of those involved in disputes over who was at fault in an accident think a dash cam would have been helpful to prove their innocence and save on unnecessary legal costs.

With growing demand for the devices, along with the rise in Insurance Premium Tax to 9.5 per cent from six per cent in November, RAC is following other car-insurance providers by offering a discount to those who fit a dash cam.
[....]
----------

The rest of the article at:

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/...ad-number-drivers-using-dash-cams-double.html

 

[ThePro]

Can't wait until insurance companies in America give those discounts. That way I could really give myself an excuse to buy a very good setup.

 

[DT MI]

Can't wait until insurance companies in America give those discounts. That way I could really give myself an excuse to buy a very good setup.

Last time my policy renewed I asked my agent if there was a discount for a dash cam. She asked "What's a dash cam?".

 

[CheckYourLights]

Can't wait until insurance companies in America give those discounts.

I have been asking around with no luck. They say it is a good idea, but that it is for my personal protection and do not offer discounts for DashCams.

 

[Bungus]

I have been asking around with no luck. They say it is a good idea, but that it is for my personal protection and do not offer discounts for DashCams.

Same here.

 

[Deleted member 46308]

Last time my policy renewed I asked my agent if there was a discount for a dash cam. She asked "What's a dash cam?".

About what you would expect

 

[sludgeguts]

In my experience, those offering discounts tend to be way more expensive anyway. Even after the discount, they are still dearer.
TBH, insurance companies don't care as they aren't the ones who lose out. they get their money by loading the premiums of the innocent motorist.
They say it costs millions in payouts - but what about the millions of motorists who never claim but face ever increasing premiums? A company cannot lose money year on year & still continue trading.

Despite the prang being back in March, our insurance is still squabbling with the other guy's insurance - despite my witness saying the guy cut up loads of vehicles at a previous roundabout & came booting along the empty (left turn only) lane in order to obviously jump the queue. And despite my dashcam evidence showing I was in the correct lane & only just setting off from the give way lines at the roundabout!

Hard to fathom what there is to quibble about

 

[DT MI]

...Hard to fathom what there is to quibble about

Money, and not paying out any more than you absolutely have to.

 

[Module 79L]

At this growth rate someday the manufacturers will be calling them cashcams.

 

[TheRookie]

When I had an accident recently (the white van decided to sharply change direction on roundabout), the other party instantly blamed me.
I've told my insurer (Tesco) that I had a video evidence of the contrary but they didn't want to know.
However, when I contacted their insurance (Allianz) and told them that I can send them the video, they instantly admitted liability, without even seeing it. They said they are not interested in the video and instead just sent me a letter stating that "in our view, it is our client who was at fault; use this letter as an admission of liability.".

I guess insurers are simply profiling each party involved to see who can cause more trouble (i.e. taking them to court) and declaring the least troublesome party as being at fault.

 

[Deleted member 46308]

At this growth rate someday the manufacturers will be calling them cashcams.

From what I see, some are most likely thinking that now

 

[jokiin]

unfortunately there are still too many Trashcams

 

[Deleted member 46308]

unfortunately there are still too many Trashcams

Sure does seem so for sure. That is why I stick with the best, and try not to experiment too much.

 

[Module 79L]

unfortunately there are still too many Trashcams

But also fortunately, most of them end up in the trash can.

 

[Deleted member 46308]

But also fortunately, most of them ended up in the trash can.

If I had not found this forum, I would probably would have purchased some of that junk as well.

 

[TheRookie]

IMO, even a cheap trash cam is better than no cam in these situations.

 

[Sunny]

Insurance, whether it is auto, home, health etc... is a for profit business.
They make money no matter what.
They increase rates when others claim but never decrease rate regardless.
If you claim yourself, you have to pay them back in installments with increased rate.
At least some give cash back or accident forgiveness after having clean record for a while.
It's tricky trap as you want to pay but don't ever want to use it.
It's very beneficial on very high payout claims though for the individual but overall insurance company will recoup it and more.

 

[sludgeguts]

I found out the hard way - even if you win, you lose.
It took me a long while to find out the real reason why my car insurance premiums had gone up was because I had made a claim. They weren't interested in the fact that I wasn't to blame & the other insurer paid 100% of all costs, simply asking them to do a job on my behalf - which I had already paid them to do (I had paid my premium in full at the time of renewal) - meant I was now an inconvenience to them & they were going to make me pay extra for a few years by way of payback.

IMO, if you are 100% non-fault then this shouldn't be reflected in your history. Yes, I had a prang, HOWEVER, it cost you nothing. Even if it did cost you, you were in a position (as my insurer) to recoup all costs from the other company.
I've since been advised to always pay extra for legal cover. Next time you have a prang that isn't your fault, you then put in a claim for out of pocket expenses - in other words, you want compensation for the coming years of increased premiums.
I mean come on, what a crock of crap.
The way insurance companies crap on the innocent motorist, it's no wonder there's so many whiplash claims!

 

[Sunny]

I found out the hard way - even if you win, you lose.
It took me a long while to find out the real reason why my car insurance premiums had gone up was because I had made a claim. They weren't interested in the fact that I wasn't to blame & the other insurer paid 100% of all costs, simply asking them to do a job on my behalf - which I had already paid them to do (I had paid my premium in full at the time of renewal) - meant I was now an inconvenience to them & they were going to make me pay extra for a few years by way of payback.

IMO, if you are 100% non-fault then this shouldn't be reflected in your history. Yes, I had a prang, HOWEVER, it cost you nothing. Even if it did cost you, you were in a position (as my insurer) to recoup all costs from the other company.
I've since been advised to always pay extra for legal cover. Next time you have a prang that isn't your fault, you then put in a claim for out of pocket expenses - in other words, you want compensation for the coming years of increased premiums.
I mean come on, what a crock of crap.
The way insurance companies crap on the innocent motorist, it's no wonder there's so many whiplash claims!

Yes, that's why there is a question when applying for insurance.
Were you involved in an accident in last 5 years even if it was not your fault?

If it was hit and run like in parking lot, you have to claim using uninsured and they'll put that on record.
But they also put you on record as risky driver even if someone hits you and their insurance pays in full.
How is that risky driver? Just because you drive, you are risky?
Aholes!

 

[Rajagra]

Part of the problem is that insurers aren't too bothered who is the guilty party. They have a nice pally system that works to their mutual benefit. The payouts cost what they cost, and as long as each company pays for its fair share of cases, they are all in profit and happy. Having simple rules (e.g. holding the person behind responsible for a rear-end collision) costs no time money to investigate, they can sort it out quick and move on.

The idea that drivers can produce evidence that ruins this easy-mode profit system probably horrifies them.