Tempo

My favourite driving home DJ Johnny Vaughn was talking today about how a recent survey had pointed out that fast music while you are driving causes fast driving.

He quite correctly pointed out that this is a regularly occurring story and is stating the bleeding obvious.

There was then much debate about AC/DC and he asked his listeners to suggest their most speed-inducing tunes - funniest of which was The Benny Hill Theme.

He also mused about whether this applied to someone riding a donkey and, if it did, would the rider or the donkey have the headphones on.

Personally, anything written by Jim Steinman or anything Rave-ish from the '90s will do it for me.

I decided to find the latest findings and one article I found was this one from The Driving Instructor's Association.

Basically, insurers Allianz have teamed up with Spotify to curate safer playlists for driving to.

It actually seems like a very good idea.

The only thing is, I also sometimes like to listen to my Chilled Ibiza CDs.

What will they do about drivers falling asleep at the wheel?

Dangerous electric switch.

Do people switching from internal combustion to electric crash more because of the higher speeds that can be attained quickly?

That is the question raised today by Autocar.

It's an interesting question and the commenters at the bottom of the article make some interesting points too - well done for an interesting debate - I'd like to continue it here but virtually nobody reads my Blog and I can't be doing with promoting it.

Hertz, who have got shut of 20,000 Teslas say it is because "they were involved in more accidents than the renter’s ICE vehicles."

I would dispute that the reason was their electricness though - I'd have thought it was more down to renters struggling to get used to the stupid controls and lack of indicator stalks and the distracting central screen.

Other factors making electric more likely  to crash would be they tend to be:

• heavier
• taller (bloody SUV cross-overs)
• driven by younger people
• have more distractions for the driver

The weight may be countered by the fact that they have a low centre of gravity due to mostly underfloor battery packs.

And, as well as the more distractions, there will also be more safety features.

So what do the insurers tell us?

The Autocar story quotes Howden UK&I Retail who tell us “There are 26% more accident claims for EVs than for ICE vehicles.”

That seems quite conclusive.

Except, Thisismoney (who I nicked my photo off) tell us that HPI tell us "Looking specifically at cars up to a year old, the study found that a total of 40 EVs (0.01 per cent) were scrapped out of the 334,525 on the road last year.  This compared to 701 of 2,026,146 ICE vehicles (0.03 per cent)"

And Fleeteurope.com have this story telling us that the German Insurance Association analysed data showing that electric cars are responsible for five to 10 percent fewer accidents on average than comparable vehicles with ICE engines. "responsible for" though - not "involved in"

I honestly don't know the answer to this - maybe nobody does yet.

In the meantime - just enjoy the charged discussion.

Sexy Cars

Honda HP-V anybody?

Now there's a car that doesn't seem to deserve to be in a Post entitled "Sexy Cars"

How about a Mondeo STi?

Now that's a bit more like it.

But wait...

...haven't I got those car names a little wrong?

That's a Honda HR-V (an SUV with all the allure of a sexually transmitted infection) and a Ford Mondeo ST TDCi (although the ST Fords have been referred to as STi in the past - sexually transmitted injection perhaps?)

So why am I suddenly linking sexually transmitted diseases to cars?

Because Trevor Noah and The Daily Show have just caught up with this story.

A Missouri woman has been awarded $5,000,000 (yes five million!) after catching HPV from her boyfriend in his car which was insured by big American Insurance company Geico.

He didn't tell her that he was infected and needless to say - he is now her ex-boyfriend.

But that's hardly the car's fault (a Hyundai Genesis apparently) - if they had had sex in his bed, would be claiming on his home insurance?

It turns out this is more to do with a point of law and Geico not putting forward representation when given the opportunity - the BBC have a slightly, very slightly, more sober account from 4 days ago here.

Anyway, for her cheek alone, this woman should be given a clap.

Pilots Take Flight

Hit-and-Run is a serious crime.  And somebody in the Australian state of Victoria has been critically injured so I'm not going to make light of it.

But the driver is blaming her car.

The Drive story is here.

She can't be too bright because when she did the "run" bit, she did it on foot leaving the car behind.

It's a Tesla and she claims it was in "auto-pilot" mode.  I'm sure the car will be able to tell the Victorian Police what mode it was in at the time, but even if it was driving, as Tesla keep pointing out, the person sat in the driver's seat is still in charge.

I think Tesla really could do with renaming that feature.

Apparently, when this comes to Court, there will be much interest in the outcome from a legal responsibility point of view and also from an insurance payout point of view.

But at least she was caught.

Unlike the paraglider pilot in this story.

Renault Megone

Couple of unusual crime stories from this week.

First an idiot in Northampton buys a Renault Megane, doesn't insure it, gets behind the wheel, nearly crashes into a Police vehicle and gets it impounded:

Fox News have the story here.  Being Fox News, they aren't too good on accuracy.  They say that it was a "new silver Renault Megane" - that is actually a Megane cabriolet of approximately 2005 vintage.

Meanwhile, over in Dewsbury, Yorkshire, an 18 year old was arrested for suspected drink/drug driving after crashing into somebody's front porch, collecting the front door on the way and driving off.

Somehow. 

Lord knows how.

The Police Twitter feed has some great comments added including "That's an Audi not a Porsche". 

There's probably some joke here involving Jehovah's Witnesses or Double-Glazing but I'm not sure what it is.

Maybe he was just unhinged?

Greater Manchester Police Lamborghini Collection

They've collected three in the last week or so.

This is the latest:

The BBC story is here.

 

The idiot driving it turned up at GMP to pick up an uninsured car that had been seized.  The Police noticed that he wasn't insured to drive it so seized it too.

 

Now it just needs a paint job and some flashing lights and they can be like the Dubai Police: 

Belted Earl

Or Unbelted Duke.

There have been a couple of follow-up stories on the BBC website after The Duke of Edinburgh's crash on Thursday.  First there was him getting a replacement car the following day.  He must have very good motor insurance.  And then there was him being told off for driving without a seatbelt after that:

 I wasn't going to mention it but then I saw this on Facebook so needed an excuse to share it:

Confused.com

I was a bit confused by this headline.

It comes with this BBC story.

 

I took a screenshot in case they realise it is confusing and consequently correct it.

 

You see, to me, the headline is telling us that a woman in America sent some pictures of herself to her insurer when she should have sent them to her car.

 

In actual fact, she sent pictures of herself to her insurers when she should have sent pictures of her car to her insurers.

 

I hope that clarifies matters.

I've never heard of insurers wanting pictures of a car they plan on covering but I suppose it would prove that any claim made for side or front damage wasn't already there when they took on the risk - so it sort of makes sense.

It means they can GoCompare the pictures.

Admiral Not Being Admirable

This what a female admiral looks like:

Her name is Michelle J Howard.

This what an actress playing an admiral looks like:

Her name appears to be Lucy Barker.  She appears in the annoying adverts for Admiral Insurance.

I suppose their logo could be interpreted as male or female since I'm sure most Navys would insist on the hair being concealed under the hat:

But it can't just be that which makes our Admiral admiral look unbelieveable.

Unfortunately, this isn't the only piece of nonsense produced by them lately.

We also have Admiral First Car Quote!

Which supposedly links your Facebook profile to your car insurance quote so work out what sort of driver you will be.

By the way, here's my new Facebook Profile picture:

My hobbies involve driving slowly on Sundays and good car maintenance.

Facebook do not like this idea - and, as a lot of news outlets (including the BBC) are saying, they have blocked it.  I don't blame them.

Admiral's Q&A on their website has an interesting question and answer today:

 I hope they're not too embarrassed by all this.

(In case you are not a lepidopterist, that's a Red Admiral)

A Crushing Blow

If you happen to use the underground car-park in a certain block of flats in S.E.London, you'll have had a shock when you came to get to your car today.

I say "today"- I read this BBC report from today but it doesn't actually say when the event happened.

It's a strange one.  A water pipe has burst causing polystyrene insulation under the floor to expand, raising the cars until they were damaged by the car-park roof:

You wouldn't think polystyrene would be that strong.

I spent ages trying to work out what this car actually is.  It's obvious from the badge that it's a Ford and I've finally decided that it's an Explorer.  It was particularly unfortunate that it was a tall car parked under some pipework - the Fiat 500 next to it looks like it might have got away with it.

The article goes on to say that if any of the cars were removed too hastily it could result in a gas explosion.

An interesting engineering problem.

I wonder who will be paying for this damage - I bet there's no wording in motor insurance policies about vehicles being crushed by rising polystyrene.

Meanwhile, this chart shows rising polystyrene prices:

It is the bit at the end - and it is just Chinese polystyrene prices.  Following plant closures in April, production of polystyrene has been reduced, tightening supply and causing prices to rise. Increased demand for high impact polystyrene (HIPS) and expandable polystyrene (EPS) in particular further supported the price rise. However, despite lower production rates and rising production costs, coupled with high demand, prices still remained down 20% year-on-year.

It's amazing what you learn when you put "rising polystrene" into Google.

Insurance Bond

Today is Back To The Future Day.

But I covered that last week so let's talk James Bond instead.

Here he is getting out of his Aston Martin DB10 - a car you can't actually buy.

Therefore, it would be a nightmare to insure.  I've just renewed my car insurance so I know it can be a bit pricey - mine was not far short of £300.  But I do have full no-claims discount.

One company I didn't ask for a quote from though, was Kwik Fit Insurance.  I've heard several stories over the years of people going in to Kwik Fit Centres with a puncture, or needing some cheap tyres, and being told they need a new exhaust and a new set of shocks.

Shocking.

So imagine trying to get a motor insurance quote and finding out you need life insurance and pet insurance too.

Kwik Fit have also come up with a quote for Mr.Bond.

Here it is.

It seems to take in to account third-party items that I'm not sure he would be liable for - like damage to a Jaguar C-X75 (also unavailable for sale - and unavailable for replace as new) but surely it is the responsibility of whoever looks after Spectre's insurance.  I'd imagine they would accept knock-for-knock on that one.

It also takes into account "Number of near-death experiences" but doesn't mention occupation.  He could call himself "Navy Officer" or "Government Employee" in which case, that might not be too bad.  I don't remember seeing "assassin" on my confused.com form so that may not be an option.

Obviously Mr.Bond will not have built up a no-claims.

Kwik Fit seem to think that Q has to foot the bill.  If so, he could do a lot worse than seeing what Confused can do for him - bound to be cheaper than Kwik Fit's £1.5 million.

And he'll get a free Brian toy.

The Most Expensive Veyron Ever?

So why am I showing you a 2012 video of a Corvette?

Because this Corvette is (or probably "was" very soon) owned by Andy Lee House of Lufkin, Texas.  He seems to have a habit of making fast cars go fast, as can be seen in this 2006 video of him driving the most expensive Veyron ever - be aware there is swearing on this vid:

He claimed to have tried to avoid a pelican causing him to crash his $1million car into a swamp just after he had insured it for $2.2million.

I recall reading this story several years back and thinking it sounded fishy then.  Literally fishy.

Now then, no pelican on the video together with other evidence gleaned by investigators (as opposed to alligators) watching the clip showed that he had been telling porkies in 2006 so no payout.  And now, since it has come to trial, this Veyron could also have cost him up to 20 years in the clink.  Fox have the story here and The Mail, who always love an expensive car crash, have it in much more detail, here.

And what price freedom?

Here's a photo of the car being recovered from its swim:

Something to consider next time you approach a pelican crossing.

Could you just spare a minute...

...to sign this petition?

Honest John in The Telegraph is imploring us to sign one.  This is one of many on the Government's e-petition site, http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/.

This particular one asks the question, "Are some car insurers killing off Speed Awareness Courses?" and claims that, "Some car insurers are now increasing premiums for drivers who complete Speed Awareness Courses, despite them not being convicted of any offence. Perversely they are penalising drivers for choosing an option that is proven to improve driving standards. This is illogical and unfair, it deters others from taking the course and could affect its future availability. Insurers should promote Speed Awareness Courses, instead some penalise drivers who complete them."

I have signed it.

And so has my wife.

Basically, I think these courses are a very good idea and am annoyed at the motor insurance industry picking on them as an excuse to up premiums.

I am no stranger to the e-petition site and was one of 43057 signatories on the sadly unsuccessful petition to keep Formula 1 Free to Air in the UK.

After signing the Speed Awareness petition, I decided to see what other car-related petitions were on the Government site.

One of the first to catch my eye was another irritating insurance industry one: "Non-fault accident impact on Car Insurance"

This one reads,
"Please consider following changes for car insurance:

1. You need to declare last 3 years fault/non-fault accident claims while buying car insurance. Insurance companies say that as per some stats, a person is more likely to be involved in an accident if they have had any accidents in the past and in many accidents, there is a fault ratio involved.

We believe that such stats cannot be applied to every accident. Ex: If someone has been hit on the back of their car while they were stationary/moving in traffic or parked in parking bay, how they could become more prone to accidents in future?

Currently, they are still penalized by increased premium for next 3 years due to non-fault accident claim.

To avoid such situations, either non-fault claim declaration should not be mandatory while buying car insurance or a process should be defined to calculate fault ratio.

2. Insurance companies should be required to provide a breakdown of premium calculation in insurance quote."

Last year I was hit on the back of my car while I was stationary.  Now, how could I become more prone to accidents in future?  I didn't even make a claim - it was all done through the other person's insurance but I still have to declare it.


Next, I found "Car Lamps should be easy to replace" which tells us,

"All too frequently cars are seen with lights that are not working. Whilst some people will habitually ignore a defective lamp, the increasing tendency for manufacturers to make lamp replacement impossible for the average motorist to undertake, means that a garage appointment is required to fix the lamp.

The Government should therefore legislate to force manufacturers to make bulb replacement easy and well within the capabilities of most motorists without having either to damage your hands or remove large parts of the car to access the lamps.

This would increase road safety and therefore make driving safer!"

Even with my small, girly hands I struggle to change modern car bulbs - they tend to be positioned with the battery or fusebox or some pipework making them virtually impossible to get at.  So, yet another petition I agree with.  I think it's a bit fanciful though, to assume that the Government would legislate on it.

And, while we're on the subject, will Halfords please stop advertising the service of bulb-replacement when you purchase a bulb off them - if you actually look into it, they'll only do it if it is easy to fit anyway.


So, how about "Cars to give cyclists space"?

Apparently, "Cycling is the transport of the future being healthy, cheap and non polluting however many would be cyclists are deterred from taking up cycling on British roads due to the dangerous disregard by some motorists for cyclists.

Cyclists need a cars width between them and overtaking motorists to feel and be safe on the roads. Motorists passing cyclists with just inches to spare between them and the cyclist are putting cyclists at risk and causing distress and fear of harm which is a crime in itself. Cyclists have every right to use the public roads and should not feel threatened in doing so.

We are calling for the Government to make Police take much more robust action on motorists putting cyclists at risk prosecuting dangerous motorists in the same way as those threatening physical violence."

As a cyclist and a car-driver I appreciate the argument from both sides although haven't particularly noticed it as a problem when on two-wheels.  Any police officer witnessing a driver intimidating a cyclist would, I am sure, take some action, especially if a perceived danger was involved.

So how about a petition to make the Police take more robust action against cyclists contravening the road laws - like riding two-abreast on a main road when there is a perfectly good cycle-lane marked out on the adjacent pavement - OK, so it's not illegal, but it is bloody annoying - and a safety issue.


Now for one getting into the realms of fantasy - or is it?

How to stop car chases involving police.

"To stop car chases involving police all new cars should have wireless networking built into engine management systems. Each car could have a code stored in DVLA that the police could use to disable that engine.

If a car fails to stop, all the police need to do is send the code to the engine. That will effectively stop the car. This would save many lives and could be used against stolen vehicles.

Encryption would be used to stop any random signal affecting any engines.

The govenment need to make this law for all new cars/bikes."

Maybe it is possible nowadays.  It would put Tracker out of business but in any case, would be a manufacturer added option if anything.


However, the petition that most amused me - and mostly entered the realms of fantasy was the one entitled "water powered hybrid cars"

This one, funnily enough, only has one signatory - presumably the person who created it.  It informs us thusly,

"The government are wasting away our life's and others by causing us to waste away our money,lives and our future generations causing our own deaths when we can do something about it

all the government is doing is stopping us from buying water powered cars so they can take more money off us.

we can save money and save the planet in 100 years our human race could end up dead or back up in the dark ages so please sign and save us all and our future generations "

When I'd stopped laughing, I did a Google Images search for water-powered cars and found this:

It's a G-Wiz!  Now the G-Wiz is famously electric and I thought electricity and water were supposed to be a bad mix.

And is that Hannibal Lecter sitting in it? 


I wondered if any other countries allow the general populace to come up with sensible and daft petition subjects like this.

Canada, Australia, South Africa and Russia all seem like a big no.

But in America, they have - https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/

Unfortunately, the only car-related petition in there was the extremely boring "overturn franchise laws that limit auto manufacturers from selling their vehicles directly to consumers."

Then I remembered that Americans like to call cars "automobiles" so I did a search on that but there was nothing there.




OK, I think that's enough petitioning for one post - I'll sign off now.

It's a Steal!

What would you rather steal, a Prius or a Land-Rover?

Would you?

I wouldn't steal either - I'm not a car-thief!

According to The Mirror this week, the Land-Rover Defender is the most-stolen car (in Britain at least) in terms of numbers stolen per number on the road.

They quote a survey by Swiftcover Insurance which shows Land Rovers, Audis and BMWs are more likely to be targeted by thieves than ordinary family saloons, despite having state-of-the-art security. The Swiftcover bloke says, "Given that luxury vehicles are usually alarmed, well protected and parked in affluent neighbourhoods, it’s surprising that they’re still so likely to be targeted."

No it isn't.

Just about all cars produced this Millennium have alarms and immobilisers so if you're going to go to the trouble of nicking a car you'd best go for one you can sell for big money or razz around in at high speed trying to escape the cops. Which brings us, quite neatly, to the subject of the least-stolen cars. Swiftcover don't tell us what they are...

...but Fox do.

They have this story this week quoting The National Insurance Crime Bureau or NICB for short. The NICB throw the following dodgy numbers at us: Of the 1.2 million Prius cars (that's a very big number) sold since the Year 2000 (in America at least), only 2439 have been reported stolen. They say this is one in 608 vehicles (I calculate it as 1 in 492)

They go on to say, "Even more incredible, 96.7 of the stolen cars were recovered, leaving only about 80 unsolved cases over the past 12 years." - that is incredible - especially the .7 - it would actually mean that 2342.3 of the cars were not recovered. I think a per-cent sign is missing from their story.

The NICB spokesman agrees with the Swiftcover person - "the above average income level of Prius owners could play a role, as the cars are often kept in safer neighborhoods and under better security" - they don't agree on the spelling of "Neighbourhoods" though.

I'd have thought that it was more to do with the fact the Prius is only really going to appeal to the environmentally friendly joy-rider.

A Family Affair

Caught this rather nice article in the online Telegraph this week. It came with this very cheesy photo:

It's about BTCC driver (and reigning champion) Matt Neal teaching his twin sons, Will & Harry, to drive now that they have turned 17.

William and Harry!!

I hadn't though of him being a Royalist. I also hadn't thought of him as being old enough to have kids old enough to drive. He's only about my age!

His sons will have an excellent teacher and it looks like he is trying to keep their feet on the ground including some professional lessons as well. I'm not as sure of the car choices though, a sporty Corsa and an old Beetle with no seatbelts. The former will cost a fortune to insure and the latter has no seatbelts.

I've not mentioned the BTCC much this year - but I haven't missed a race and they have been just as exciting as every recent season. I've not watched any f1 meanwhile and am not missing it in the slightest.

The BTCC last weekend was at Rockingham and much rain caused much sliding off but there were no major disputes - unlike last year when this excellent picture was taken:

I don't usually credit the pictures I find on the 'Net but this is worth a link and a mention of Life Exposed Photography as this picture perfectly captures Matt in full-on anger mode where no other picture of the incident I've found does.

Here, Matt is launching himself at Jason Plato after a serious shunt in qualifying. Good! - we like some passion in our racing drivers. Jason is wisely keeping his helmet on given that Matt practises martial arts and is considerably bigger than him. Meanwhile, their dads are in the picture trying to make sure it doesn't get any worse.

A very un-cheesy photo - but, then again, racing-driver Matt Neal will be nothing like family-man Matt Neal - I hope! And it looks like it is family-man Matt Neal that Wills & Harry have as their driving instuctor.

This Guy Needs A Bridging Loan

That picture of a collapsed bridge is taken from this MSN story about a Chinese truck driver fined £15.5 million for driving a seriously overloaded truck over a bridge which collapsed under its weight. This could affect his no-claims discount. It doesn't state whether or not there was a sign at the bridge with a max weight limit - something I would put as crucial to his guilt. But, in any case, it is a fine excuse for me to publish these photos I found on Google Images:...and my particular favourite...

Risky Business

This is a tricky one for me.

What Car? are reporting that the EU is to outlaw discrimination against men when it comes to setting motor insurance premiums. I've always felt a bit miffed that women get cheaper insurance than men just because they cost less in claims. I haven't said they crash less because I'm not convinced that they do - they just do less damage because they are travelling much slower when they do it.

This is a point I made last Summer when my good blogging friend North of the Border commented in his Blog about poor driving. To quote me last July, "Surely cheaper insurance for women should fall foul of sex descrimination laws? What would happen (and the data must exist) if they started basing premiums on skin colour?"

I am still uneasy about this though, since if they are not allowed to take into account the risk on sex-grounds, will it go further and they won't be able to discriminate against the higher-risk groups like sportsmen and entertainers? Or people who live in inner-city crime hotspots? Or Mexicans?

The main reason for me to comment though is as an excuse to embed this: