I've got the app on my phone, and if anyone doesnt know what it is or haven't heard of it, to my understanding it basically tracks how your driving using your phones GPS. Sees if you're sticking to speed limits etc. After each trip it gives you a rating, and once you've driven 250miles with it on, it will calculate your total score. If its good, companies such as admiral will apparently give you 10% off. I think you have to have an account with confused.com.

Anyway, I've used it a few times and each time having it on certainly made me conscious of how I was driving and how fast etc. If it can be accurate, I think it's quite a good idea. Some reviews on the App Store claims its rubbish and inaccurate, but it gave me a good score each time when I drove carefully. Would be interesting to see if it did know if I put my foot down a bit.

Anyone else used it or think its a good idea?

Thats a good idea if you can get a discount.

I'l give my phone to my nan to drive around for me

So, in essence, you can be a good boy for 250 miles (not difficult really) and they'll give you a discount off an over-priced policy in the first place.

My son lives in Preston, 260 miles along some fairly boring M-class roads. Takes just over 4 hours to do that run, most of which I do with the cruise-control switched on. Nathyp will give his phone to his nan to run around with. (I'm assuming she's not a Silver-haired Racer ;) ).

The flaws in this idea are fairly large. I'd prefer a discount for something more useful, like car-cams. Or go the whole hog and have a black-box. Relying on data from a phone will be ambiguous at best. Mind you, if it's their app, they'll probably have uploaded your 250 miles and will sell that data on quite happily for "research" purposes.

Think I'll be giving that as much of a miss as possible.

You have some good points there, but the way I see it, if they're willing to offer a discount, then why not take advantage and try and save yourself a bit of money?

I recently asked Admiral if they'd give a discount for having a dash cam, that was a no, and I also asked what discount I'd get for having an IAM license. The answer, for me, was a £9 charge. How that works I'll never know.

Shopping around will probably save you more than the 10%

I always do! I use the comparison sites, then pretty much call EVERYONE not on them :L

But for me anyway, Admiral have always been cheapest, so an additional saving seems ok to me.

Was just interested to hear people's thoughts on it. I'm sure a black box would be much more accurate and give better discounts etc.

I also asked what discount I'd get for having an IAM license. The answer, for me, was a £9 charge. How that works I'll never know.

'Insurance company in make up prices as they go along shocker!'

I think its laughable that people go for the 'if you drive well with our black box you will get a discount'. You will in all likelyhood get a hiked premium anyway because they seem to have no interest in retaining customers. Plus I'm not yet interested in next year's premium, I want a good priced one this time. I actually, out of curiosity, put in my details and the black box quotes were nothing special and certainly didn't fill the top spots on comparison sites.

Re: dashcams, I had to wait on hold for 20 minutes while Admiral tried to work out what one was. In the end, they did note it down, but as an interior decoration... I did also get asked if it increased performance.

Do a track day with the app running

Re: dashcams, I had to wait on hold for 20 minutes while Admiral tried to work out what one was. In the end, they did note it down, but as an interior decoration... I did also get asked if it increased performance.

One of the brokers on here actively discourages dash-cams and feels they're only used for scams.......

http://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/265106-dashcam-one-for-the-brokers/#entry3190457

Come to think of it, if they have a category 'interior decoration' what else could potentially be required to be declared into it?

I did read that thread RainbowFire, I don't see how that is discouragement. The camera footage is your own and they don't automatically have access rights to it, just because you've told them you have one. You are unlikely to willingly prove you were at fault in a crash, but they are unlikely to want you to prove you are at fault too. If someone hits you from behind because you suddenly swerved infront of them, they will pretend not to see the footage.

Come to think of it, if they have a category 'interior decoration' what else could potentially be required to be declared into it?

Ah, now you're back into "what is a modification" terratory. If the dash-cam stays as a plug-in unit: is it a mod? If it is, then plug-in air-freshners, sat-navs, re-chargable torches are too. If it's because it's physcially attached to the windscreen, then sat-navs and note-pads too.

A modification used to be classed as something that enhanced the performance of the car in some way. I suspect it won't be long before such things as baby-seats will be classed as a modification (especially ISOFix ones)

I suspect that, as the "modification" category is vague, having one of their black boxes installed will be classed as a mod and the premium raised accordingly. Heaven forfend that anything the insurance company does would be for their policy-holders benefit. ;)

I did read that thread RainbowFire, I don't see how that is discouragement. The camera footage is your own and they don't automatically have access rights to it, just because you've told them you have one. You are unlikely to willingly prove you were at fault in a crash, but they are unlikely to want you to prove you are at fault too. If someone hits you from behind because you suddenly swerved infront of them, they will pretend not to see the footage.

Ollie believes they'll only be used for scamming (although I really can't see how). So, if you're at fault in an accident, you'll not be man enough to admit it? I can understand that for most people. We currently live in a culture where our actions have to be blamed on someone or something else. If you're driving dangerously, I can understand wanting to avoid prosecution and the consequences thereof. Mind you, as in the speed camera thread, the best way to avoid being prosecuted, is not to commit the offense in the first place.

If, in having the camera, you get a reduction, then I would submit that the reduction would entitle them to any footage from your vehicle, assuming, of course, there was a card in there or it didn't "get lost in the post.

Ok, so maybe not a reduction in premium, given the "variable" nature of accidents. Incidents involving video footage tend to be resolved quicker, so maybe some sort of bonus/reward/rebate as the insurance companies, as they will have had to have spent far less time processing the claim.

I read what Ollie said as it will be used to prevent you being scammed, not scam yourself.

And yeah, I agree. We (me + her) have cams in both our cars and we don't drive like idiots. Best way, as you say

Ah, now you're back into "what is a modification" terratory. If the dash-cam stays as a plug-in unit: is it a mod? If it is, then plug-in air-freshners, sat-navs, re-chargable torches are too. If it's because it's physcially attached to the windscreen, then sat-navs and note-pads too.

A modification used to be classed as something that enhanced the performance of the car in some way. I suspect it won't be long before such things as baby-seats will be classed as a modification (especially ISOFix ones)

I suspect that, as the "modification" category is vague, having one of their black boxes installed will be classed as a mod and the premium raised accordingly. Heaven forfend that anything the insurance company does would be for their policy-holders benefit. ;)

Ollie believes they'll only be used for scamming (although I really can't see how). So, if you're at fault in an accident, you'll not be man enough to admit it? I can understand that for most people. We currently live in a culture where our actions have to be blamed on someone or something else. If you're driving dangerously, I can understand wanting to avoid prosecution and the consequences thereof. Mind you, as in the speed camera thread, the best way to avoid being prosecuted, is not to commit the offense in the first place.

If, in having the camera, you get a reduction, then I would submit that the reduction would entitle them to any footage from your vehicle, assuming, of course, there was a card in there or it didn't "get lost in the post.

Ok, so maybe not a reduction in premium, given the "variable" nature of accidents. Incidents involving video footage tend to be resolved quicker, so maybe some sort of bonus/reward/rebate as the insurance companies, as they will have had to have spent far less time processing the claim.

What Ollie is saying is most people will happily hand over footage when they want to claim against someone else, yet if the boot is on the other foot their experience is people are suddenly unwilling to hand footage over. Your own comment above suggests you'd fall into this category by claiming it didn't record anything or was lost when being sent to them.

I think you're being a tad unfair on Ollie and sky and twisting what's being said to make them appear anti dash cam.

You can't expect a discount then pick and choose whether you're going to provide footage.

Think these apps and boxes are a right scam,

Feels more like big brother is watching more and more,

plus with councils idea to drop the speed limit rather than repair the roads its a right laugh

It keeps getting mentioned that people will withhold footage of crashes when it's their fault, but why on earth would the insurer want proof? Without the footage they can press for 50/50 or something else.

'well, from what you describe it was a 50/50 and the other party doesn't disagree'

'but I have video!'

'ooh, lovely, yes, its entirely your fault, we get to pay all of it'

Video can incriminate you, but it's hardly in the insurers interest.

I think it comes down to whether you pushed them for a discount for having one or not. Or even have previously provided footage for a claim.

Personally I don't think there should be a discount unless it's linked to a telematics unit so footage is automatically sent to insurers as they do in the US and the driver can't pick and choose.

My main use for a dash cam is to record the scrote who runs into your car on a supermarket car park and drives off at least it gives you a chance of finding them.Making them pay is another thing entireley.

Do a track day with the app running

If you can't do a sub 9 min lap of the ring the app should mark you down!

Also does it mark you down if your a middle lane road hog? Don't use indicators? Or generally a crap driver?

I think you're being a tad unfair on Ollie and sky and twisting what's being said to make them appear anti dash cam.

If you go back to the thread where this was discussed, you'll clearly see where Ollie tells everyone he wouldn't have one of these devices. Actually he's mentioned it in several threads. So far, other than the belief they could be used to scam someone, there's been no reason why given. As the posting is made under the "Sky Insurance" user, it would not be unreasonable to take this as the view from said insurer.

If there was a posting from Shark about remaps, or Preston Motors about how awful a certain car is, it would be reasonable to take that as an offical point of view. If it was a personal PoV IMHO it shouldn't be made under a company cover.

You can't expect a discount then pick and choose whether you're going to provide footage.

Again the response from Ollie was about a single car incident, not submitting the footage when you'd been doing something silly and wanted to claim for the damage. Well, you shouldn't have been doing something silly in the first place on the highways. IIRC 99% of "off highway" incidents wouldn't be covered by your insurance in the first place.

What you highlighted from my post was not what I would do, but what a lot of others would do. If I had a discount for a camera on-board, I would quite happily hand the card over, no matter what had happened.

The footage would seriously cut down the amount of time insurance companies spend trying to put the blame on each others customers. This would reduce time and money spent on the process. This would result in higher profits, or lower premiums. (You can guess which one the insurers would take.)

I believe that Boss Fox has said that he puts the footage on YouTube and sends the interested parties the link. This has resulted in claims being completed within six weeks.

You could easily provide it as an "eye witness" account for an incident you were not involved in too. (Oh wow, community spirit and all that karma stuff too!)

Most of us on here drive well within the confines of the law and don't drive in a manner that is dangerous to ourselves or others. With this is mind, why would you not want a camera in the car?

..............unless you have something to hide.

If you can't do a sub 9 min lap of the ring the app should mark you down!

Also does it mark you down if your a middle lane road hog? Don't use indicators? Or generally a crap driver?

A camera alone wouldn't, but a Black Box could record your GPS location for road position. Connected into the diagnostics, you'd know just about everything about the car at the time. (Steering angle, throttle position, what lights where on etc etc. Coupled with video footage, this would all an overall opinion to ge given on where you are indeed a crap driver or not. )

A camera alone wouldn't, but a Black Box could record your GPS location for road position.

I work in this industry and frankly commercially accessible GPS is so bad it will put you in the field next to the road half the time, it has no chance of telling what lane you're in. It couldn't tell you were going down the wrong side of the motorway. We use software to snap the positions to roads before its mapped because its so hopeless.

So if you let avivia put a black box in along with a camera linked back to them so they can see how good / bad your driving is, they can

1- Up your premium for having a modification ?

2- Have full access to your movements which they can sell to other businesses whom you have visited to send you twice as much junk mail

&

3- Having monitored your driving for say 3 months decide that based on the telemetrics they want to change your policy & charge you different rate each month, & a the end of the year when you decide to switch insurers they charge you to have it removed.