http://www.progressive.com/auto/snapshot-common-questions.aspx
Who is dumb enough to allow their insurance company to monitor and track their every driving move? This thing plugs into your diagnostic port and records all details of your driving habits. Why on earth would anyone voluntarily subject themselves to this kind of monitoring???
I’m guessing there are some people out there who are ok with this. Are you one of them? Obviously I’m not.
That had better be one helluva discount, and include some improper personal favors from Flo.
But I can see parents who have their offspring under their policy (or who are helping pay for the car or the insurance) going for it.
Rain man, maybe.
Absolutely not. Between that and On-Star (I don’t have it either) plus the black boxes you can’t make a move in private. At least the Progressive thing is opt-in unlike the other items I mentioned.
Never, ever, ever.
I got a letter from my insurance company (State Farm) the other day advertising the same thing. I said hell no.
Because they want lower car insurance rates. Next question.
actually, I’m cool with it if it lowers my premiums significantly. I don’t fear the black helicopters. But I would certainly do the math. Then again, I drive a mini van occaisionally on the weekends and that’s it.
People will agree to this?
Conservative drivers will (I used to work for an ad agency which had one of the big auto insurers as a client; I’ve seen the market research on the subject).
Within 5 years, you can count on every major auto insurer (and a lot of the minor ones) to be offering these, and increasing pressure from them to use them.
I might. It’s not tracking “your every driving move.” It’s tracking three things: how many miles you drive in total, at what time you’re driving, and how frequently you brake sharply. There’s no GPS or anything like that. I drive fewer than seventy miles most weeks, usually at off-peak hours and rarely between midnight and four, and I can’t think of the last time I had to brake sharply. I live in a small town and quite close to my work (and the local bar scene); if I can get a discount for that, why not? They claim the maximum discount is 30%; as a young male, my rates are already inflated by other peoples’ behavior. Why shouldn’t I take a discount for my good habits?
I would. Man, car insurance is expensive- why not? I don’t speed or tailgate, therefore I rarely brake sharply. I mostly just drive to work and back. What’s the big deal?
How much money we talkin?
And, as I understand it, how frequently you accelerate sharply, though they don’t talk about that in the FAQ for Snapshot: http://www.progressive.com/auto/snapshot-common-questions.aspx
If you say so. I only read the FAQ.
appleciders said as much as 30% (of what?) and the FAQ said it won’t be used to raise your premium.
I have to wonder what’s in it for them? Do they feel that people will put on less miles, drive less at night and drive more carefully (in order to avoid sudden braking) and therefore avoid accidents? I’m assuming the device is free or at the very least an overall net savings to the customer, but there must be a reason behind it. If they’re claiming it won’t be used to raise your rates, I can only assume they’re hoping it’ll make people safer drivers and therefore they’ll payout fewer claims.
I think it’s at least partly a marketing tool. They’re trying to get people to switch over and holding out possible savings as a carrot.
It depends how much money it can save me. I’m currently paying $118 a month for comp+collision+liability. If I could pay, say, $80 a month for the inconvenience of installing the device and becoming a cautious and considerate driver who rarely exceeds the speed limit, I’d take it.
Not only no, but hell no.
We have six vehicles in our family, four are used daily, and the average per-vehicle is about 25000 miles per year. Any pay-by-the-mile plan would cost me a fortune. All our driving records are spotless*, so currently our premiums are reasonable.
With 4 drivers, we only have 1 speeding ticket on our record(s).
Actuarial science allows an insurance company to set the premium for you based on what they know about you. The reality is that they don’t know very much about you, other than to what risk groups you belong. So if they know that you:
-are a male
-under 25
-have a DUI conviction from a couple of years ago
They know from all of their data that people like you have a certain probability of filing an insurance claim for X dollars within the next year, and so they set your premium accordingly so that they will probably make money.
“But I’m a better driver than that, I should have lower premiums!” you complain. Really? Here’s your chance to prove it, your chance to give them more information about you and paint a more accurate picture of your true driving risk. Demonstrate to them that you are not always stomping on the gas and brakes, and you don’t spend a lot of time driving at night. If that’s really true about you, then the risk of you filing a claim in the next year is lower than it is for the entire pool of under-25 male drivers with DUI convictions, and they can charge you a lower premium and still be likely to turn a profit.
If they’ve got the same profit margin as they do (on average) with the entire group of under-25 male DUI convicts, then what’s in it for them? Well, they can attract more customers with the lure of potentially lower rates, then that’s good for them. Insurance company A charges everyone $500 a year, insurance company B’s basic rate is $500 but they’ll only charge you $350 if you use this data recorder to demonstrate that you’re a better-than-average driver. Which company will you pick?