Beware of Geico!!

[bulwnkl]

That quote from Bedard's is more recent than the article I was referring to (sort of a later follow-up), but not all that much. Thanks for posting it.

As for Geico wanting to reduce claims payout through reduced speed, there is insurmountable evidence from decades of federal research that shows that lower traffic speed does NOT reduce accidents. The insurance companies know this as well any entity out there, yet they (some of them at least) still want more speeding tickets issued. Trying to "rescue" a traffic speed measuring device manufacturer? But they don't want more tickets issued? Tickets issued for behavior identical to that prior to the issuance, and therefore with no change in claims paid? Follow the money.

I'll buy the PR w/PDs. They help the PDs make huge cash even though there's no demonstrable safety benefit, so the PDs in turn treat the ins co nicely by writing more tickets. Follow the money.

Tax-deductible contribution? There are literally millions of those that would actually BENEFIT people, and many (dozens? hundreds? thousands?) that would actually increase safety (and reduce claims paid) simultaneously. But one that comes with the "additional benefit of slightly increased premiums," despite zero increase in safety and therefore zero reduction of claims paid? Follow the money.

 

[jred321]

As for Geico wanting to reduce claims payout through reduced speed, there is insurmountable evidence from decades of federal research that shows that lower traffic speed does NOT reduce accidents.

i did not say reduce the number of accidents but instead reduce the other aspect of a claim, the severity. the faster you go the more damage you do so the more the ins co has to pay

it sounds like you think the ins co is out to get you. in actuality their goal is to accurately measure the risk presented, take premium for it, invest that money until such time that the premium paid is returned to the insured through a claim. the goal is to basically break even. given the market some years things are a little better than even, some years worse. the key is the accurate pricing of premium to risk presented and assessing that risk beforehand is tricky

if this small time action upsets you then you better not be around in a few years when insurers require you to have a device in your car that monitors your speed, distance travelled and location in real time (along with many other variables, think OBD II or III when that comes out) to calculate your exact risk presented. but even then the goal is still to take in as much premium as you're going to pay out in claims with profit coming from the time in between premium collection and claim payout

 

[coolmazda5]

It all depends on the nature of the ticket and in the case of speeding the amount of mph's over the posted speed limit. All companies have different underwriting guidelines, thus some companies may not switch rating tiers or surcharge your rates for a ticket. If you've been a good driver with a zero loss history you may catch a break. Depends on the individual company involved.

Gotcha, thanks. Out of curiosity I just checked my current policy and it is back to a "good driver" mode. The one time ticket came around 2003, so the "black list" seems to get cleared out after a couple of years or so (angel).

 

[bulwnkl]

I don't think the ins co is "out to get" me individually. I know that the ins co is out to make money, NOT to break even. Insurance companies are some of the most profitable businesses in this country, and this not-at-all-small incident was an excellent illustration of that point.