IAM report

[martine]

Lates IAM press release...has a nice message in my view...(my bold bits should make interesting reading for BRAKE )

Licenced to skill: new IAM research reveals causes of crashes

Driver and rider error or poor reaction are behind the top three causes of fatal and serious crashes, new research from the IAM this month reveals. Cars don’t lose control; drivers do.
Licenced to skill: Contributory factors in road accidents, launched last week in London, presents the analysis of five years worth of accident data, recorded by the police between 2005 and 2009.
Factors including ‘failed to look properly’ ‘loss of control’ and ‘poor turn or manoeuvre’, accounted for 65.3 per cent of fatal, 61.8 per cent of serious and 68.6 per cent of slight accidents. Injudicious action - illegal or unwise judgements – such as exceeding the speed limit, following too close, or making an illegal turn, was the second biggest factor, accounting for another 31.4 per cent of accidents. Alcohol was a relatively minor factor, listed in only ten per cent of fatal accidents.

Behaviour or inexperience came a close third, being a factor in 28.0 per cent of accidents. In contrast, physical circumstances such as road environment, factors affecting vision, and vehicle defects are listed as issues in very few accidents.

‘Travelling too fast for the conditions’ accounts for more fatal accidents than ‘exceeding speed limit’, which represent fourth and fifth places. Driving too fast isn’t necessarily just a case of a legal requirement – you could be driving too fast for the conditions, without breaking any official speed limits at all.

IAM chief executive Simon Best said: “What is obvious from the top three rankings is that many accidents could be prevented by drivers simply changing their behaviour, as well as gaining more experience. That so many crashes are caused simply by the driver failing to look is shocking. On the positive side, there is plenty that drivers can do to reduce their risk of being involved in an accident.

“Having a driving licence doesn’t necessarily mean that drivers have the skills they need to be safe. Professional drivers, like HGV drivers, participate in continuous professional development, improving their driving skills throughout their careers to reduce their accident rates, insurance costs and to increase their fuel efficiency – why is life-saving training not expected of those who drive for personal reasons?”
“The evidence is there. Accidents could be easily reduced by improving driver skills and lives could be saved – especially those of young drivers. The IAM calls on the government to introduce post-test training, to support young drivers through the most dangerous part of their driving career, and to improve their skills for the rest of their lives.”

[crr003]

Interesting - if I could only make the percentages add up!

"The IAM calls on the government to introduce post-test training, to support young drivers through the most dangerous part of their driving career, and to improve their skills for the rest of their lives."

Who's going to do this? ADIs will be banging on about monies worth (a little group has kicked off on a LinkedIn forum) - and the magic word "training" is in there. Maybe the DSA can make Observers/Tutors a special case?

[ROG]

Professional drivers, like HGV drivers, participate in continuous professional development, improving their driving skills throughout their careers to reduce their accident rates, insurance costs and to increase their fuel efficiency

Put LGV/HGV driver as an occupation for car insurance and it goes UP!!

[daz6215]

Professional drivers, like HGV drivers, participate in continuous professional development, improving their driving skills throughout their careers to reduce their accident rates, insurance costs and to increase their fuel efficiency

Put LGV/HGV driver as an occupation for car insurance and it goes UP!!

Disgrace aint it!

[vonhosen]

Professional drivers, like HGV drivers, participate in continuous professional development, improving their driving skills throughout their careers to reduce their accident rates, insurance costs and to increase their fuel efficiency

Put LGV/HGV driver as an occupation for car insurance and it goes UP!!

That'll be because of mileage covered & therefore exposure to risk.

[MGF]

Professional drivers, like HGV drivers, participate in continuous professional development, improving their driving skills throughout their careers to reduce their accident rates, insurance costs and to increase their fuel efficiency

Put LGV/HGV driver as an occupation for car insurance and it goes UP!!

That'll be because of mileage covered & therefore exposure to risk.

Exposure to risk only happens when driving a car. The risk associated with driving the LGV/HGV is covered by separate insurance. It is illogical to apply risk not covered by the insurance to risk that is.

[Kevin]

Professional drivers, like HGV drivers, participate in continuous professional development, improving their driving skills throughout their careers to reduce their accident rates, insurance costs and to increase their fuel efficiency

Put LGV/HGV driver as an occupation for car insurance and it goes UP!!

That'll be because of mileage covered & therefore exposure to risk.

Really?

When I phoned my insurance company and asked to have driving for business purposes added to my insurance (for example, travelling to meetings or training courses), my insurance didn't go up, even though that would obviously increase the mileage I covered in my private car. I then mentioned, in the same phone call, that my occupation had changed and that I was now a lorry driver, whereupon £25 per year was added to my premium. I don't use my car insurance to insure the company's lorries, so why does my becoming a lorry driver increase the mileage in my private car? Or, for that matter, my risk of being involved in an accident?

As the IAM report says, my lorry driving was assessed annually and I went through additional training, all of which improved my driving generally, not just in a lorry. The increase in private car insurance premiums for lorry drivers never did make any sense to me.

[crr003]

I don't use my car insurance to insure the company's lorries, so why does my becoming a lorry driver increase the mileage in my private car? Or, for that matter, my risk of being involved in an accident?

You think that's odd?
I've heard Police Advanced Drivers say their insurance goes up when they say what they do too.
The insurance companies know what they're doing - they have tables and statistics!

I can think of a scenario - you drive to work; you drive a lorry all day (tacho rules etc.) and then you get back in your car and drive home. More risk?

[Kevin]

I don't use my car insurance to insure the company's lorries, so why does my becoming a lorry driver increase the mileage in my private car? Or, for that matter, my risk of being involved in an accident?

You think that's odd?
I've heard Police Advanced Drivers say their insurance goes up when they say what they do too.
The insurance companies know what they're doing - they have tables and statistics!

I can think of a scenario - you drive to work; you drive a lorry all day (tacho rules etc.) and then you get back in your car and drive home. More risk?

Yes, I'm sure the insurance companies have statistics that say lorry drivers are a greater risk. Can't argue with stats.

Your second point may have validity. Tiredness may play a factor, however, when I was 'just' a car driver, I found long trips particularly arduous. After becoming a lorry driver, long distances became less tiring than before. I assume this is due to a significant increase in driving experience, an increase in hazard awareness and anticipation and the better ergonomics of lorry cabs and driving seats than found in a typical car. Also, I've had driver tiredness awarness training . Perhaps someone with an insurance background will come along and explain it all to me.

[GJD]

That'll be because of mileage covered & therefore exposure to risk.

Exposure to risk only happens when driving a car. The risk associated with driving the LGV/HGV is covered by separate insurance. It is illogical to apply risk not covered by the insurance to risk that is.

Indeed. Not to mention that your insurance company doesn't need to try and deduce the element of risk due to the number of miles you drive. They already know that from your answer to the question, "how many miles do you drive?"

[vonhosen]

That'll be because of mileage covered & therefore exposure to risk.

Exposure to risk only happens when driving a car. The risk associated with driving the LGV/HGV is covered by separate insurance. It is illogical to apply risk not covered by the insurance to risk that is.

Indeed. Not to mention that your insurance company doesn't need to try and deduce the element of risk due to the number of miles you drive. They already know that from your answer to the question, "how many miles do you drive?"

But the previous driving may have an effect on the later driving & therefore the risk you represent in it. The insurance companies no doubt have data that supports that lorry drivers present a higher risk than some other groups (despite being subject to CPC).

Of all the collisions professional lorry drivers are involved in how many for instance have them on the way home from work ?

[MGF]

That'll be because of mileage covered & therefore exposure to risk.

This implies a proportionate risk according to how many miles a driven.

But the previous driving may have an effect on the later driving & therefore the risk you represent in it.

This is saying something different. Not that you are exposed to the same level of risk for longer but that the risk increases with extra miles driven.

The insurance companies no doubt have data that supports that lorry drivers present a higher risk than some other groups (despite being subject to CPC).

No doubt and all other comments are just plausible explanations for that statistic. Hopefully the insurance companies are only looking at car claims when looking at risk rather than all claims. If it is the latter they may be paying twice for the same risk.

[Gareth]

I can think of a scenario - you drive to work; you drive a lorry all day (tacho rules etc.) and then you get back in your car and drive home. More risk?

Tiredness may play a factor, however, when I was 'just' a car driver, I found long trips particularly arduous. After becoming a lorry driver, long distances became less tiring than before. I assume this is due to a significant increase in driving experience, an increase in hazard awareness and anticipation and the better ergonomics of lorry cabs and driving seats than found in a typical car. Also, I've had driver tiredness awarness training

Yesterday I was reading about how lack of sleep affects us. Recent research shows that even when we think we are coping with tiredness, our actual ability is reduced. Our perception is at odds with the reality.

I imagine there is increased risk of driving a private car when tired for professional drivers, hence increased premiums.

[jont]

Recent research shows that even when we think we are coping with tiredness, our actual ability is reduced. Our perception is at odds with the reality.

Isn't that true generally for most peoples perception about their own driving ability? /forum members excluded

[crr003]

Got my copy by email today - interesting front cover - "relaxed" steering style, interesting seat belt strap, and no key in the ignition!

Interesting that they question the 77 factors used on the STATS19 form. It is a very complicated looking form!
http://www.stats19.org.uk/html/accident_forms.html