Why smart gadgets still don't work in insurance

Hi GT! Earlier, I wrote about how to assess the damage to a car after an accident, and shared a couple of life hacks on the design of a “green card”. Today I would like to dwell on a rather controversial topic related to smart gadgets .

They are designed to reverse the negative trend that has emerged in the field of voluntary auto insurance. "Smart" sensors and systems already analyze the driving style of car enthusiasts, but will they help change the tariff policy of insurance companies?

At the moment, there is no such certainty. Although the foreign "picture" in this niche looks very attractive. Specialized applications for smartphones and telematics devices allow you to read the parameters of the "vital activity" of the vehicle and save on insurance for those who demonstrate careful driving.

It is profitable and popular in the west. In our country everything is different.

Here are the main points that hinder the development of "smart" insurance in Russia.

"Copy, and there will be seen"

Official data from the largest insurance companies suggest that the number of “smart” policies in the Russian market does not exceed 1-2% of the total number of hull insurance policies. On the one hand, about 80% of customers who switched to telematics, still managed to get a discount for neat driving. On the other hand, potential reckless persons chose to refuse such a service in advance, and their driving style remained “unnoticed”.

Today it is impossible to say that someone will succeed in one moment to “shift” foreign systems, their hardware and software to the Russian realities. All this will need to be adapted. At the same time - “pull up” the legal framework.

The situation with the introduction of telematic systems is complicated by the fact that the insurance companies themselves do not take “smart” insurance seriously. For them, this is something like a “hobby” that lasts a couple of weeks, is accompanied by loud slogans and is gradually disappearing. Although it is the insurers who should be the first to take responsibility and explain the possibilities for clients, to talk with people about common tasks, such as keeping the client’s property safe and sound.

Moral dilemma

One of the concerns of customers is the "total surveillance", which can potentially emerge in the market due to the lack of regulation of the turnover of personal data and the so-called "big data". Insurance companies are in no hurry to explain how and for what purposes they plan to use aggregated data.

The device keeps a record of how you brake and accelerate, how you turn into turns - based on this you get a certain rating, which affects the discount when concluding an insurance contract. Today it is not necessary to say that the client clearly understands what he will receive for this or that degree of “softness of braking”. Algorithms of the “pay as you drive” type are often hidden from the average person under the pretext of protection against manipulation.

Here the following problem arises: that any driving style analyzer puts an economical driver in an awkward position. The “moral dilemma” is that an emergency may require sudden braking, and a rash driver may be too keen on a “game” with telematics. The person will try to please the “black box” first of all, and he won’t think what it might lead to.

Practice shows that the amount of data does not mean the accuracy of the findings. Today we can not get information about the intersection of continuous and other offenses that are not associated with a sharp acceleration and deceleration. Here the insurance history is still relevant, which tells more about the driver than telematics.

"Where is the profit?"

To date, most of the offers with telematics do not allow saving on the cost of the contract. If the price of an ordinary hull insurance is almost the same, then there is no sense in “bothering” and putting additional sensors on the vehicle.

In addition, there may be issues of compatibility of a gadget (or application) when moving from one insurance company to work with a completely different one. The insurance chosen by the client will not necessarily meet.

The device may be outdated, and its replacement will cost more than any discount on the insurance contract. Even in the case of the simplest security systems, which can give up to 70% discount on hull insurance, we still say that in a year people are faced with the need to deactivate or replace equipment for extra money. We do not need such “savings”.

The conclusion and still "something positive"

It’s too early to talk about the massive use of telematics and big data in Russia - this requires an appropriate regulatory framework and “training” the audience. Today's technology and regulatory framework is just being chosen to start penalizing violators on the basis of video from smartphones and tablets of citizens.

But there are positive stories. For example, the initiative to switch from paper to electronic passports of the vehicle. It allows you to make and make adjustments to the TCP using the Internet. The transition to the "figure" is intended to simplify such procedures as state registration, customs clearance, taxation, buying and selling and approval for use and making any changes to the vehicle passport.

Electronic PTS will be controlled by state operators. This will make it harder to distort vehicle history data. But there are certain risks associated with ensuring the safe and stable operation of the entire system and workflow.

The main task is to prevent falsification of records and “freeze” of the system for an indefinite period (which can “hang” all transactions in the market). One of the options for “safety net” is to get a current extract from the database (at the request of the vehicle owner), but this is again “paper” ¯ \ _ (ツ) _ / ¯.

Thank you for attention! I would be happy to discuss the situation in the comments.

Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/406123/

All Articles