This potentially opens a different can of worms. Who pays after the accident? Does the insurance company still pay and then go after the miscreant, or is the not at fault party left to their own devices?But in the new scenario if there’s a crash the insurance company would by default look at the new log of what happened. Should the logging of data be disabled or the log show it was travelling at greater than allowable speed the insurance would be invalidated.
You, if the not at fault party, are left to your own devices in this situation at present.This potentially opens a different can of worms. Who pays after the accident? Does the insurance company still pay and then go after the miscreant, or is the not at fault party left to their own devices?
But in the new scenario if there’s a crash the insurance company would by default look at the new log of what happened. Should the logging of data be disabled or the log show it was travelling at greater than allowable speed the insurance would be invalidated.
I would assume it’s like it is now if you have invalidated your insurance. If you have a car invalidated by insurance and crash, your insurance would pay 3rd party. It wouldn’t cover costs to your car. They would also cone after you to recoup what they paid to 3rd oartyThis potentially opens a different can of worms. Who pays after the accident? Does the insurance company still pay and then go after the miscreant, or is the not at fault party left to their own devices?
That's quite simple. If the technology is there for smart monitoring of cars it could also be made to flag up immediately if a vehicle is being used that isn't taxed, insured or doesn't have an MoT.I have no data to support this but I suspect that most chipped/remapped car owners do not inform their insurers. They are relying on the fact that they will never be challenged, and even if involved in a collision, their insurance company will not investigate the cars software. I base my suspicions purely on banter on various motoring message boards, when I have been seeking advice on remapping cars I have owned.
I'm worried that too many Herbert's will put an undue level of faith in the tech and drive everywhere with their foot planted to the floor "safe" in the knowledge that the car won't exceed the limit,
Have a look at the news articles , they mention various technologies being used to establish the limit as it changes.If you're gonna do it, then it needs to be GPS controlled. There's no point having a 70mph limiter fitted Tina car if the driver spends most time in 20 and 30mph zones.
And I'm against it.
Mrs L's car has a speed limiter (but activated and adjusted manually). There's no abrupt loss of power, just a gentle tailing off as you approach the limit.I've been driving with a speed limiter on (70mph) and pulled out to overtake a slow lorry. When I got to 70 the power was cut, it's not a nice feeling to be accelerating and then to be stuck in lane 2 or 3 with no power. Driving instructors teach that you can exceed the 70mph limit by 5mph in order to overtake safely, similar to what the AA were suggesting in the article. I think it's a bit over the top to compare safe overtaking to blitzing down lane 2 at 120!
Have a look at the news articles , they mention various technologies being used to establish the limit as it changes.
Undoubtedly they will have the limit set a little above the actual speed limit so that the speed cameras can continue generating revenue.
I've been driving with a speed limiter on (70mph) and pulled out to overtake a slow lorry. When I got to 70 the power was cut, it's not a nice feeling to be accelerating and then to be stuck in lane 2 or 3 with no power. Driving instructors teach that you can exceed the 70mph limit by 5mph in order to overtake safely, similar to what the AA were suggesting in the article. I think it's a bit over the top to compare safe overtaking to blitzing down lane 2 at 120!
That's quite simple. If the technology is there for smart monitoring of cars it could also be made to flag up immediately if a vehicle is being used that isn't taxed, insured or doesn't have an MoT.
I think a speed limiter with an over ride facility is not a speed limiter