Car Security - Trackers - Talk to me about what to look for t

onomatopoeia said:
Boxster S, back when even the earliest ones couldn't be had second hand for much under 30K. Perhaps it was the soft top, or the value, or combination thereof (though I got told the same when I asked about a 911 or 355, both of which have solid roofs). Wouldn't be required to day, the car is 16 years old and worth less than many a three year old dull front wheel drive eurohatch repmobile due to age and mileage, and the fact that Porsche sold a lot of them and they don't seem to rust or break down, so there are loads still around.
Click to expand...

Strange as even when a new Porsche Boxter it wasn't and isn't a requirement for me. Let's face it, it isn't now nor was then a very expensive car. There must have been another risk to.

nilagin said:
Not really, they will just use any excuse to raise an insurance premium when it suits them.
Click to expand...

Brilliant @nilagin knows even better than an actuary. Sure then totally make it up and just any excuse. Wow there is no end to to your talents to make yourself look like an arse. Unbelievable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nod
I thought the general thing was that trackers were only required on very high value or non-replaceable vehicles, such as classic/limited edition cars?

My E36 and E46 M3's didn't require a tracker, however a quote from the same company for an E30 M3 had a compulsory tracker requirement...
 
dejongj said:
Brilliant @nilagin knows even better than an actuary. Sure then totally make it up and just any excuse. Wow there is no end to to your talents to make yourself look like an arse. Unbelievable.
Click to expand...
A road on a nice area can be split down the middle one post code on one side of the road and a different post code for a different borough on the other side of the road. If you live on the side of the road covered by the postcode for the borough with a higher car theft rate, you will pay a higher premium than if you lived across the road in the other borough.
Another example is your career. Most peoples careers have absolutely no bearing on whether you are likely to be involved in an accident, yet if you change career you can find yourself paying more or less per year as a result, even though you are the same person.
Like I said they will come up with as many excuses as they can to increase premiums.
If you know different, feel free to divulge.
 
I have no idea - I was living in Portishead, which is not crime central, car was garaged at my property overnight, no claims in several years and full NCD and I'm a computer nerd by profession, not a journalist or footballer. All the mainstream insurers and comparison sites said "what tracker do you have fitted?", not the more usual "do you have a tracker?" and would not proceeed without me specifying one. They stopped asking once the car hit six years old. Since it had one I didn't worry about it too much, and yes, it's not a vastly expensive car compared to some. It's not even vastly expensive list price wise compared to the fabulously unreliable boring diesel Audi estate on my drive.
 
nilagin said:
A road on a nice area can be split down the middle one post code on one side of the road and a different post code for a different borough on the other side of the road. If you live on the side of the road covered by the postcode for the borough with a higher car theft rate, you will pay a higher premium than if you lived across the road in the other borough.
Another example is your career. Most peoples careers have absolutely no bearing on whether you are likely to be involved in an accident, yet if you change career you can find yourself paying more or less per year as a result, even though you are the same person.
Like I said they will come up with as many excuses as they can to increase premiums.
If you know different, feel free to divulge.
Click to expand...
@nilagin I would give you some friendly advise buddy, stop digging. Seriously stop digging. I honestly don't think you have a clue what actuaries do and the kind of studies they go through. These aren't people with a sense of humor unless your are a geek. These aren't people that make things up, it would never ever enter their brain, it isn't wired like that.

onomatopoeia said:
I have no idea - I was living in Portishead, which is not crime central, car was garaged at my property overnight, no claims in several years and full NCD and I'm a computer nerd by profession, not a journalist or footballer. All the mainstream insurers and comparison sites said "what tracker do you have fitted?", not the more usual "do you have a tracker?" and would not proceeed without me specifying one. They stopped asking once the car hit six years old. Since it had one I didn't worry about it too much, and yes, it's not a vastly expensive car compared to some. It's not even vastly expensive list price wise compared to the fabulously unreliable boring diesel Audi estate on my drive.
Click to expand...

I guess it is something location specific where statistically it may be more at risk. Only the insurance company would know. And yes I agree; list price wise it is not bad at all, it is really good value for money. I nearly got the original first boxter if it wasn't that I required 4 seats and thus ended up with a T18 version of the Saab instead. The boxter was actually less list price. And is still great value compared to your nice German or Swedish family car. In my case when the insurer required it, I just went to another insurer, price was no different.
 
dejongj said:
@nilagin I would give you some friendly advise buddy, stop digging. Seriously stop digging. I honestly don't think you have a clue what actuaries do and the kind of studies they go through. These aren't people with a sense of humor unless your are a geek. These aren't people that make things up, it would never ever enter their brain, it isn't wired like that.
Click to expand...
Didn't think you could come up with any evidence that I was wrong.
Both those things I mentioned are actual scenarios where the data by which insurance premiums are calculated have bigger holes than Swiss cheese.
 
nilagin said:
Didn't think you could come up with any evidence that I was wrong.
Both those things I mentioned are actual scenarios where the data by which insurance premiums are calculated have bigger holes than Swiss cheese.
Click to expand...
Seriously pal? I mean really?

Sometimes it is really good to know ones own limitations and which points to argue.
 
dejongj said:
Seriously pal? I mean really?

Sometimes it is really good to know ones own limitations and which points to argue.
Click to expand...
Yes seriously. Isn't it amazing that, yet again, when you can't give a definitive answer, you (your not alone either) try to belittle me and try to make out I'm out of my depth.
When asked your occupation by insurance companies, the options they use are not always that accurate. I have always had one of those occupations. Depending on which one of their options I use that is even close, is anything from £20-£50 difference in the premium. The only difference between the two as far as the statistics are concerned is that they have a higher percentage of claims from people under one occupation than the other. It doesn't really mean that you are at anymore of a risk of making a claim, so come on, don't be shy, explain why they load premiums as a result.
 
nilagin said:
Yes seriously. Isn't it amazing that, yet again, when you can't give a definitive answer, you (your not alone either) try to belittle me and try to make out I'm out of my depth.
When asked your occupation by insurance companies, the options they use are not always that accurate. I have always had one of those occupations. Depending on which one of their options I use that is even close, is anything from £20-£50 difference in the premium. The only difference between the two as far as the statistics are concerned is that they have a higher percentage of claims from people under one occupation than the other. It doesn't really mean that you are at anymore of a risk of making a claim, so come on, don't be shy, explain why they load premiums as a result.
Click to expand...
The reason being that I haven't studied 6 years to become a trainee actuary. Just like I will not argue with a brain surgeon on the best route to get into my brain, I will not discuss the intricacies of a risk profile where a heck of a lot of data, resource and calculations has gone into. If you want to have a pub style moan about it and pretend that you know better then I would seriously suggest you apply for that job as I can guarantee you it will be better paid than what you or I, or most on here do currently ;) This has nothing to do with trying to make out that you are out of your depth, I know I am compared to what they do, and the information they have access to, and the models they develop. But pretending that you know better is just silly.
 
It's several years ago we were involved with some quite extensive research with trackers, including testing a unit with Tracker themselves, I will try to remember what I can about it.
If you are going to buy a unit then get a GPS/VHF unit, VHF still sends out a signal through containers and most UK ports have VHF detectors at them, GPS is far to easily blocked with cheap easily purchased blockers, VHF is a completely different ball game, we went through all the bigger companies and ended up only interested in the tracker make due to the huge amount of monitoring equipment they have, how intelligent their system was and at the time they were the only company doing VHF (not sure if that's still the case).
Have a read up on the Tracker Mesh network which is a pretty clever system. There was also some other very impressive stuff certain units done if they are parked in the vicinity of other units owned by the same person.
The sad thing is you will never even remotely cover the cost of the unit or even just the subscription from insurance reductions, at the time we were looking the latest units weren't even listed by our insurance company.
 
Last edited:
Postcode and job most certainly can and do impact a person's insurance premium.
 
off topic n
new defender
phooooor
 

Attachments

  • lr_defender_3dr_mt_aav2_0_0_0.jpg
    lr_defender_3dr_mt_aav2_0_0_0.jpg
    65 KB · Views: 17
dejongj said:
The reason being that I haven't studied 6 years to become a trainee actuary. Just like I will not argue with a brain surgeon on the best route to get into my brain, I will not discuss the intricacies of a risk profile where a heck of a lot of data, resource and calculations has gone into. If you want to have a pub style moan about it and pretend that you know better then I would seriously suggest you apply for that job as I can guarantee you it will be better paid than what you or I, or most on here do currently ;) This has nothing to do with trying to make out that you are out of your depth, I know I am compared to what they do, and the information they have access to, and the models they develop. But pretending that you know better is just silly.
Click to expand...
Some things just aren't as complicated as you may think. It doesn't take any training nor data, to realise that someone changing a job role at the same place of work is of no more of an insurance risk just because their job title has changed, same goes for which side of a road they live, yet their insurance premium is determined by their post code.
 
scraggs said:
If you are going to buy a unit then get a GPS/VHF unit, VHF still sends out a signal through containers and most UK ports have VHF detectors at them, GPS is far to easily blocked with cheap easily purchased blockers, VHF is a completely different ball game...
Click to expand...
That's not right. Or at least, not entirely right.

GPS receivers don't transmit. They just receive signals transmitted from GPS satellites and use those signals to work out where they are. GPS signals are weak and don't penetrate through solid materials very well at all, so GPS doesn't work indoors. In that sense you're right when you say that GPS is easily blocked; but if you're in a place where the GPS signals can't reach you, your GPS unit can't work out where it is.

In order for your GPS unit to tell you where it is, it needs some kind of transmission capability. There are lots of options for this in principle: Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, GSM (mobile phone), VHF, etc. All of these have different characteristics regarding transmission range, power requirements, and ability to penetrate walls etc. It may well be that VHF is the best option and that's why it was recommended to you.

But if the GPS signal is blocked (eg inside a shipping container) there's nothing your GPS unit can do about it, because it's receiving the GPS signal not transmitting it; and if your GPS unit can't receive a GPS signal it doesn't know where it is, so it doesn't matter what technologies it has at its disposal for communicating its position.
 
Slightly off topic......

I can remember a friend of mine having a Sierra Cosworth in the late 90s and he had to have a tracker fitted plus a physical form of immobilisation i.e. disklok to meet his insurer's requirements. They even wanted to charge him a premium for parking it in a garage. Their justification was that if a would be thief made it into the garage, they would be out of sight and could take their time negating the security features.

Anyway...... back on topic...... As others have said, most modern cars are pretty secure (excluding the ones with vulnerable keyless entry systems). I'd guess insurance companies would have a value where it is in their interest to recover the car ASAP rather than have to pay out in the event of a theft, although the sort of thieves that go after high-end vehicles are likely to take precautions and assume a tracker is fitted which could render it next to useless.

Sadly it comes down to is someone wants something badly enough they'll probably work out a way of doing it.

I guess the best thing to do is have a decent policy with gap insurance so if the worst happens you won't be out of pocket.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top