Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
AIG IRELAND IS calling for legislation to make telematics-based insurance mandatory for all drivers under the age of 25.
Telematics insurance products are designed for young drivers, in which a small box is professionally fitted to a vehicle which will then measure your driving.
It uses GPS and other technology to send information about the way the vehicle is being driven. This includes information on speeding, cornering, acceleration, braking.
It also includes accident alerts, which can help to keep a driver safe after an accident, as well as help track the vehicle if it has been stolen.
Gardaí cracked down on 225 speeding motorists during National Slow Down Day last Friday. One motorist was caught travelling at 177km/h in a 100km/h zone in Donegal.
“The technology now exists to identify these reckless and irresponsible drivers,” General manager of AIG Ireland, Declan O’Rourke said.
We feel telematics is a win-win, not just for road safety but also for our customers, many of whom are delighted with the cost savings, and being rewarded for safe driving.
“In addition, the Cost of Insurance Government Action Plan supports the use of technology to benefit consumers. AIG supports this recommendation and believes telematics is part of the answer to reduce costs for safe drivers and promote road safety,” he said.
Over the past number of years, AIG has brought telematics insurance products to the Irish market, such as BoxyMo and AIG BoxClever, but they have never been made mandatory.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
It’s only a matter of time before they try to make it a requirement of everyone driving!!
This encroachment on civil liberties (you can guarantee there will be GPS involved) is starting to seriously annoy me!
@Tricia Golden: One could argue that the act of speeding and driving dangerously, encroaches on the liberty and safety of others. Driving is a privilege, given to those who can afford it and who agree to abide by certain rules and standards. This privilege can be and is removed upon breaking a number of different contracts. It’s not a human right.
@Rob P Toonster: people of all ages speed
@Rob P Toonster: “the act of speeding and driving dangerously” – and yet the intention here seems to be to penalise the driver without any evidence of such.
You don’t get to track someone because you’ve determined they “might” do something.
As to the “human right” to drive, no one suggested I thought anything different.
I PAY for the privilege of driving. I pay tax, insurance, petrol, etc. The cost of my test, my licence, renewing my license etc.
I’ve NOT broken any of those contracts you speak of.
@Tricia Golden: The purpose surely, is preventative. And yeah, you do get to track people if you suspect they are going to do something. Ever hear of terror watch lists? Sex offender registers?
@Rob P Toonster: Okay, now you’ve turned this into an argumentum ad absurdum by equating convicted Sex offenders and a “terror watch list” to tracking drivers because they might speed!
@Rob P Toonster: With that logic we might as well put all fellas on the sex offenders list, you know prevention and all that…..
@Rob P Toonster: Let them put a security camera in your house to make sure that you break no laws there also?
@Ían Ó Ceallaigh: I think I read a book about that? Something about an older brother?
hmmmmmm
@Rob P Toonster:
In the modern world where the ability to be mobile and adaptable is a basic requirement to exist in a society where to earn a living, one must be mobile and adaptable.
If you want to be a part of a modern society, you must be connected and mobile.
So, it is not correct to say driving is a privilege, it has become a necessity for most people
@Rob P Toonster: Driving is an absolute necessity for the vast majority of people in Ireland and one they pay through the nose for. Away with this nonsense of it being a privilege which means nothing one way or another anyway. What next, is buying groceries a privilege too?
@Rob P Toonster: Driving above the speed limit alone is not dangerous driving in my esteemed opinion.
@Cindy Crawford: Well your opinion is of less value than actual stats I’m sorry to say.
@Robert Jones Smith: The motorways have the highest speed so they must have the highest accident rates. Oh wait they don’t. They rob us and now they want to track us.
@Robert Jones Smith: Well, her opinion is quite valid. You are allowed to drive around many roads in Ireland at 80 while the reality is that if you go over 30 you will likely maim people on horses, cyclists or drive your car into a ditch.
While, on the other hand, driving 150 on an empty motorway proves no more danger than before but is considered speeding.
Also, the speed limits were determined decades ago and were calculated by the distance cars require to break. New cars can come to a standstill in a fraction of the distance, yet the speed limit stays the same.
If we want absolute laws we can set the software in the cars so that they are unable to break the speed limits, and have a camera facing into the car to see if someone is paying attention to the road. Any distracted drivers will be punished and medicated to increase attention. Would this be your utopia?
@Tricia Golden: great to see them calling for more transparency – maybe they will be just as keen to push for more transparent pricing in the insurance market here where the eu commission are investigating possible cartel of pricing among the insurance companies here !!! The media is giving them a bit of a free pass Imo -probably afraid they miss out on the precious ad money the insurance industry spend on marketing – the relentless pushing of millions in insurance advertising could be better spent reducing premiums in a market this size – the so called ‘competition’ is a false narrative to be able to squeeze higher and higher premiums here – disgraceful
Road deaths are at the LOWEST they’ve been in years! And yet now they want to start tracking us!
This should NOT be a requirement for every driver, even those under 25.
Maybe if you’re done for speeding or careless/reckless driving. But you could be driving for 7 years at 25!
@Tricia Golden: yes but fender benders are up.. way way up. 9 times out of 10 people texting while driving. Maybe a mobile network blocker for cars. That would work a treat
@Peter Cavey: Are they? I can’t find proof of that, do you have a link?
@Peter Cavey: According to the Private Motor Insurance Statistics, Claim Frequency has decreased.
Perhaps I’m missing something, feel free to confirm yourself or provide data I may not have been able to find:
https://www.centralbank.ie/statistics/statistical-publications/private-motor-insurance-statistics
@Peter Cavey: Tracker will not do anything for that and would your blocker be able to only block signals in your car or interfere with pedestrians etc?
Also If I am a passenger in a car you want to block my phone?
It is also NOT illegal to call 999 from a car in an emergency situation when you can not stop safely (such as on a motorway)
@Ían Ó Ceallaigh: If you need to dial 999 on the motorway chances are you will already be stopped.
@Mike Power: Why? because you saw a crash behind you, or in the opposite lane?
Because someone is driving erratically and looks drunk?
Because there is a pedestrian, cyclist, or livestock on the motorway?
None of those are stopping reasons, if you have already passed them
So now you can pay insurance companies to make a fortune off your data…all the while opening the door to extensive abuse by the private sector and state
@Olllie B:
Any statistics to back that up?
@Olllie B: Statistics show that it is the “younger” drivers at the high incident rate.
@Olllie B: anecdotal evidence does not prove anything. Statistical data proves a point.
If one is allowed drive legally on completing successfully a driving test at 18 yrs of age, than why if deemed to be capable drivers should those in receipt of such a licence but under 25 yrs of age be penalised by paying higher premiums. Govt should not allow Insurance companies operate here unless there is a level playing field based on ability & not on age.
@Phil Duggan: under 25s crash more often. Down to lack of experience, usually drive older cars and testosterone.
I wouldn’t mind if the savings were actually substantial. I’m 24 and I would consider myself at least as good a driver as one of my parents who is occasionally subject to road rage, speeding etc. Even with the 10% telematic discount I’m still paying 6 times what they’re paying.
Until telematics actually reflects risk and rewards premium deductions correctly it’s a waste of time.
Just another way to charge more money. We all drive differently but shouldn’t be penalised because we don’t corner or accelerate according to some computer generated model.
If Gardai want to put such a level of surveillance in place on serious criminals they need to substantially demonstrate justification and necessity before authorisation is granted. A private company with essentially nothing but it’s profit at heart should be granted the entitlement to do so merely on grounds of age to monitor what in most cases may or may not be a minor traffic offence and to use it as a pricing tool ? I don’t think so…
Simply can’t be legally allowed based on age
@Kal Ipers: You would hope so but the Government has been massively discriminating against people based on age for years with people under 24 getting just over half in social welfare payments based on nothing but age. 100% unfair.
@Kal Ipers: All the insurance companies have to do is agree between themselves that any insurer will require a GPS or dash cam, else no insurance.
@B9xiRspG: Nope can’t do that either that is a cartel. Social welfare has a legal loophole around age so can.
In other countries it is an option from your insurer to have the device installed, to get a discounted policy.
I’ve seen these boxes in operation before, the original design just monitored g force, basically monitoring how vigorously the vehicle was been driven which is a good idea.
As for tracking speed and location, that’s too far to make mandatory
Big brother is watching your every move…
Will they bring down the price for those over 25? Of course not !
Why not just put a camera on to every human so we know exactly when they break any laws
What be better if the Garda enforce all current driving laws , like those who break on every bend on a country Rd, those who use roundabouts wrong, dont go on a green light, to afraid to over take then when do, do it dangerously etc….
If all this was enforce, by that all insurance would be €500, depending on what you did insurance would go up for 3 to 2/5 years + for same amount of time you have this fitted to teach you to drive correctly if dont the time will increase till you do.
@: didn’t release breaking for a bend was an offence covered by the Road Traffic Act?
They do thìs crap in the UK and kids get points AGAINST them for driving a certain times like rush hour, driving certain routes etc.
It’s extreme invasion of privacy.
Should not be allowed.
Why bother if cars are going to be self drive going forward.
@Robert Deane: I think they can self reverse also
@Robert Deane: the new generation of these boxes provide much of the data needed for self driving cars.
@Robert Deane: Yes, with self drive cars, theoretically, there will be no accidents. But I doubt if insurance premiums will ever reflect that.
Insurance companies are part of the financial services sector and we now see how amoral and corrupt they are.
No way would I support Insurance companies having access to such data.
@Robert Deane: Because so far, you still need to be a licensed driver to drive one. There will be times when the GPS isn’t working. An area-wide power cut, coverage blackout? New roads opening, bridges out, coastal erosion, flooding, diversions not on the map. The cars still need a driver present and able to take over. I love the idea, but it isn’t going to be an instant switchover to cruising along like a passenger.
Are under 25s the only bad drivers in the country? I don’t think so.
@Cindy Crawford: apply to any age category, apply to all.
I know of some older drivers in my age group who should not be driving, not because they are reckless but because spatial skills, concentration, reaction times and ability to adapt to a quickly changing environment has greatly diminished. I know of other older drivers who are very safe.
As I see it, bad driving or good driving are individual characteristics of people. Age categories are too blunt, arbitrary and discriminatory in effect.
Telematics for one; telematics for all.
I wish my car just wouldn’t let me speed. In urban areas it is sometimes hard to know the speed limit. Having a box would be like always passing a speed trap. Good for safety but not so good if inadvertently speeding, which the majority of us do.
Bringing it in may save lives and get younger drivers to drive safe but the moral bullsh#t of insurance companies regarding lives is all about premiums ..be able to catch the under 25 business and control their driving while not letting it reflect on insurance costs..still rip us all off
How about insurance companies paying to install ANPR in garda cars? That would save the insurance companies millions on uninsured cars, make the lifes of the guards easier.
Oh wait this is ireland a good idea would never be taken up
@Liam Burke:
I thought a few of the unmarked motorway cars had them installed?
Dublin players are no risk as their premiums are free!!!
If AIG’s incentives to young drivers were good enough there would be no need for it to be mandatory
Under 25 s or not , people driving for years are being squeezed dry to pay for the thousands going about with no insurance and false discs being displayed on the windscreens that can fool inspections .
If it cuts down on lane hoggers and tailgaters I’m all in favour, irrespective of age.
@Shawn Rahoon: How will it do that?
@Ían Ó Ceallaigh: Telematic also use vehicle cameras. Tailgating is one of, if not the no 1 cause of road collisions. The Gardai don’t tackle these offences, cameras will. Cameras will also speed up investigations. Advantages outweigh disadvantages of on board cameras.
@Shawn Rahoon: This has got nothing to do with cameras, it will be a box with a GPS inside. And perhaps some motion sensing G sensors.
And it’s nonsense. Motor insurance is compulsory in this country, insurance companies should not be allowed to force tracking on their customers no matter what age. Make no mistake, if this is brought in for under 25′s it will be brought in for all customers later.
@Shawn Rahoon: No it does not have camera
Speed restrictor on large vans and trucks can be disconnected what’s to stop drivers doing the same thing to this little box .
@Alan Scott: It would register. What happens when you swerve to avoid a sheep, a rolling tyre, any unexpected move? It’s a normal incident and it would be a nuisance to have to account for every spike in the graph in my view, especially if you ‘lose points’ based on some arbitrary model.
Why not telematics checks for all?
Better still, why not have a system whereby the speed limits are electronically recognised and used to feed the ECU of the car, thereby compelling the car to be driver no higher than the speed limit.
Using AI techniques, erratic driving could be recognised and the engine disabled.
Howe much is human life and safety worth?
@Fiona deFreyne: With you on the maximum speed zones. It’s often hard to tell from overgrown signs. But I’d say it’s wiser to simply record erratic driving. Forcing a sudden stop in traffic is a hazard. If I manage to dodge a loose cat flying across the road, I certainly don’t expect my engine to cut out so that I roll over it instead of completing the driver-controlled manoeuvre.
@Fiona Fitzgerald: I did into mention an emergency stop , simple an engine cut out. I also mention a course of erratic driving, not a sudden dodge avoidance action.
@Fiona deFreyne: Tony never knew you cared about human life especially Christian “human ” life! I suppose your concern is for your Jihadi brothers and sisters. That’s something I suppose?
There seems to be an assumption that cars are always driven by the same person, Many under 25 year olds are named drivers on parents insurance, and in some cases there may be only one car between multiple drivers.
Of course it could be optional – with logon for different drivers but, then when I want to go racing I just log on as someone else.
My daughter just learned to drive and she had her driving optionally recorded by her phone – the insurance companies could offer discounts – but then again what happens if you turn them off
They can F@$K right off, bad enough these vultures screw people and wiggle out of even the smallest claim, now they want to intrude further into people’s lives. Speaking of insurance, anyone renew their home insurance recently, there’s an additional question now being put to policy holders, namely have you had a judgement registered against you and have you ever been declared bankrupt. WTF has these extraordinary questions got to do with home insurance.
Going to be I irate here.. why the hell would anyone think it’s a good idea to let some faceless commercial organisation track your every move
..Oh but it makes every body safer and if we do this then nobody will die ever again..arrhhg! !
Surely it is possible to improve life on this rock
Without turning ourselves into gormless clueless
Sheep.. so i say no.
Rant over. .
have your say