The rest of the western world seems to be offering usage based insurance options but there doesn't seem to be anything available in Australia. I pay the same insurance for my car which is driven once or twice a week as my wife's car which is a work commuter (both same engine size). I thought that Youi offered this but their premiums were not even closely competitive to Budget Direct/NRMA/RACQ. Anyone have any thoughts on the matter or know of any unsurers who are considering this?
Why Doesn't Australia Have Usage Based Insurance?
dogboy on 20/07/2019 - 09:55
Comments
Woolworths does. Huddle does. Probably more.
Are you referring to the questions they ask you on your quote application, not actual usage based insurance that is tracked and proven through an app or dongle?
Yep, I signed up to Woolies and said 10,000km per year. They ask for your odo reading when you sign up, and if you make a claim either below it or over your stated limit, they slug you with an extra $1,000 excess, in exchange for a lower premium.
I am not aware of any actually tracked ones.
Everyone would just lie about how much they used their vehicle. Also usage based wouldn't decrease any of the fixed costs of providing insurance. Also consider that perhaps the people that lose their cars the least have the least driving experience which might actually increase the chance of accidents.
Most of these systems require the user to have a dongle or tracker app for proof of usage. The better ones even assess how people drive and factor that in.
I would have thought if someone loses their car often they won't be able to drive much and will have less experience
To lose one car may be regarded as a misfortune to lose two looks like carelessness.
…or they live in a suburb where glaucoma medication flies off the shelf.
The current system we have in Australia is great. We use our vehicles more than our neighbours, but pay a similar amount in premium.
Shannons offer limited use and laid up options (ie in storage/being restored). I use that for my MX-5 which is rarely driven. It's not massively cheaper but it is cheaper.
IMO individual drivers' insurance would be a great option and makes so much more sense than what's currently on offer here. Car insurance could be discounted and limited to theft or other third party damage. It's a much more itemised way of costing and spreads it more appropriately.
They should do a usage based system for rego as well.
And how about hospitals, libraries, schools, roads? Where do you stop?
You should change your name to Ayn Rand.
It's not like we don't all live and contribute to the same society or anything…
There already is a usage based system for using the roads.
It's in the fuel tax. Those who drive more, buy more fuel and pay more tax.
They're in a quandary when we change over to EVs. Not enough people will be paying the fuel tax used to maintain and build roads. The current proposal is to have your EV charged a tax based on how many KMs you've driven, payable at servicing time.
It seriously hurts the appeal of EVs if they do that. You go electric to save money on fuel, but then you get stung anyway.
I'm with a usage based insurer, and my premium ended up about 1/3 the price of similar insurance with other insurers but that's because I nominated 2000kms a year and I barely come close to that
Woolworths do have usage based premiums. I have one and only use my cars on weekends. I had to quote my odometer reading when I started with them and had agreed to 6000 kms driving limit per year. They recorded the maximum KM reading, till end of premium paid period in the insurance document. In case I had to make a claim, I just need to ensure that I am below the maximum quoted KM in the insurance documents, else I need to pay a higher premium.
Best part was that they just added 6000 kms to previous year limit on renewal. I did not use the full 6000 kms in the first year and now have more than 8000 kms remaining until end of this year.
Whats with the now 5 year disclosure of driving history and penalty even if you was not at fault! Every insurer doubled my premium for a claim where I was not at fault and got my excess back and I had NCB (no claim bonus, intact) ~ all of them…
somethings fishy in car underwritting, I think we have 2 or maybe 3 that underwite the whole industry and they are driving this, from 2 or 3 year disclosure to now 5 and no difference if at fault or not. Im almost to the point I say LIE and take your chances!
don't ask, don't [car]tel.
That's too clever, you're one of them!
The whole insurance industry, banking, electricity, gas, water, rates, stamp duty, GST and the myriad of other charges and taxes are to keep you enslaved to the illuminati.
Enjoy and your a pleb like me stop complaining and pay up.
They would make less money off you if they offered it.
Those who don't use much will pay less. Those who use too much won't take up that plan. Who do they make money off?
If you can charge the small users full price, why wouldn't you? At the end of the day, corporations answer to shareholders first and foremost. That's just the way of the world.
If governments ran insurance it would be a different story.
Too difficult to enforce.
Entire suburbs may have one insured person to be the scapegoat for thousands of collisions.