FLEET RISK COST versus FLEET INSURANCE COST

As was revealed in a recent survey (by Tom Tom Business), 40% of fleets suffered insurance premium rises in the last year and 24% admit they don’t really know what they’re required to do in terms of managing road risk.

These statistics combined are very illuminating because they imply that despite rising insurance premiums, many fleets don’t know what to do about it.  

It was only a matter of time before fleet premiums started to go in the same direction as retail premiums and this research appears to indicate a significant proportion of fleets are going to have to dig deeper or buy less insurance by increasing policy excesses or lowering cover levels.

The truth is that risk will inevitably transfer to the fleet from the Insurer if less cover is bought and it is in this scenario that fleets need to look ever more closely at how their drivers behave on the road when driving fleet vehicles under fleet insurance.

The main issue for a fleet is how to make sure that savings (including reduced claim experience) are not swallowed up by the cost of achieving those savings?  In other words, what is the point in spending money on a road risk management program if the cost exceeds its benefit?

Additionally, as a relatively new concept for fleets, how do you know if your particular type of risk program will result in the scale of savings a fleet would be happy with?  

It is easy to have sympathy with these points of view because this area of risk management is not mandated through statute and if it were not so closely associated to insurance costs, a fleet could rely on luck to avoid prosecution if it all goes wrong!

What seem to be missing are one or two key factors that would make investing in road risk reduction a more palatable and justified decision.  Factors such as an element of risk-sharing between risk management supplier and the fleet so that a service provider can participate financially in the success of the program and the contrary if risk increases.

Alternatively, the fleet can make savings through aggregating a number of related risk services through one provider to cut cost and also to gain the benefit of all risk data being in one receptacle so that planning and accountability can be optimised.

Finally, a fleet needs a partner who has risk reduction as its core mission.  A service provider that doesn’t just sell risk tools as stand-alone products but one that brings the results to life by identifying and presenting improvement opportunities from real data and who has a genuine interest in seeing the fleet enjoy the benefit of reduced accident frequency and cost.

If this approach appeals to you then please contact us here or by calling 0113 2248898.

In risk management, what you don’t know won’t hurt you?

I read with interest that fleets could be held liable if they don’t act upon high risk data produced by the telematics devices they have installed in their vehicles. The theory is that if those high risk drivers are involved in a serious incident after the fleet had been made aware of the risk, the fleet could be guilty of wilful blindness.

Wilful blindness is a term used in law to describe when an individual seeks to avoid civil or criminal liability for a wrongful act by intentionally putting himself in a position where he will be unaware of facts that would render him liable.  In other words, you will be liable if you deliberately ignore the facts available to you.

The implications of this are clearly concerning for the telematics industry but don’t have to be so worrying for the fleet.  The real question it throws up is not concerning which driver did what, how often, where and how badly. The real question for fleets is what do we do about it?

In simple terms fleets have just a few options:

1.     Stop the driver from driving – which may not be practical

2.     Ignore the risk – and suffer the potential threat of wilful blindness

3.     Implement disincentive schemes – but such action may send repairs ‘underground’!

4.     Change the drivers’ skills, habits and on-road behaviour – a supportive approach

Clearly the last of these options represents the most positive and appealing one.  However, it is also the one that entails a financial commitment, some strategic planning, a consistent approach, record –keeping, support from on high and some close monitoring.

The upside is that by choosing the supportive approach a fleet will become fully aware of its risks and be able to demonstrate a duty of care, it will experience a better claims record, insurance costs will come down and safety becomes second nature and part of the driving culture. Wilful blindness won’t be possible and won’t be a threat.

One of the additional reasons fleets may choose to turn a blind eye to poor risk data is because they may know what to do about it but don’t have the time or resource to implement it. This is where the outsourced risk management industry should be able to lend a hand in planning a program that is fit-for-purpose in terms of available budget and program objectives.

At RVM we build tailored risk management programs for fleets based on what priorities the fleet has identified.  They range from the very simple to the most complex depending on fleet profile, what needs outsourcing and at what stage of the risk journey the fleet is currently at. One thing is for sure, if a fleet chooses to invest in the supportive approach, it will want a positive and tangible benefit in return and this is why, at RVM, our efforts are designed to uncover opportunities to improve as opposed to ignoring issues that may come back to bite you.

So don’t choose to ignore bad risks and hope lady luck is on your side. Choose to learn more about what options are open to you and at what cost by calling RVM Fleet Services on 01132248898 or contact us here.

Is size everything - when choosing a Fleet Risk Management provider?

When is size relevant?  Does it influence service quality?  Is an economy of scale always a benefit? Can you equate value to the size of a supplier?  Does size affect service flexibility? The answers to these questions will depend on your experience, attitude to business risk, your priorities and fleet strategy. 

There are undoubtedly pros and cons whatever the size of a supplier and, of course, good and bad suppliers can come in all sizes but the reason for posing the question is to prompt some thought about what represents the most desirable features of a fleet risk management provider.

Features relating to size that may be relevant to a fleet will vary but generally speaking, the following factors may be important:

Flexible processes - The ability to ‘flex’ the rules for each client will vary according to the internal structure of the risk management provider as well as its size.  It is also true to say that bigger organisations are more unwieldy by the nature of their size and therefore less likely to be able to tailor their processes compared to smaller ones. 

Critical mass – Larger providers that have exceeded critical mass are more likely to have the resources to be able to spend more in areas such as marketing, whereas a small business will need more strict cost controls to remain competitive. The balancing factor here is that despite achieving critical mass, larger providers may address cost control by using more streamlined operational processes such as doing the same things more often to keep costs down (because the skills required are at a lower level). This may however result in an inflexible production-line mentality, which may only suit a proportion of fleets.

Service focus – smaller providers make quicker decisions and they have less bureaucracy in their management structure.  By contrast, these factors can frustrate a larger supplier’s desire to improve service, whilst smaller businesses can genuinely deliver a more tailored and responsive program.

Quality delivered – Larger providers have greater resources to gain quality accreditations, however, many fleets will struggle to equate a quality accreditation with actual quality delivered. Defining quality is difficult because it encompasses so many concepts; however, in simple terms it describes whether a service is ‘fit for purpose’. Whilst the rectification of complaints (due to quality issues)  may be quicker in a smaller supplier due to shorter reporting lines; quality as a guaranteed service feature belongs to neither small nor large suppliers.

Personalisation - By its nature, the feeling of whether you’ve received a ‘personal service’ will vary according to the consumer’s perception of what this concept actually means.  Everybody knows when they have and have not received it and sometimes it’s very subtle and yet still very meaningful.  Whilst all businesses strive to offer it and some succeed, the business environment in which it is most identifiable, prevalent and easy to enjoy – is in a smaller supplier.

Pricing – Due to size, many small providers may not have the buying power to achieve the margins achievable by larger businesses and this means the scope to offer more competitive pricing will usually fall in favour of the larger enterprises.  Economies of scale give options to bigger suppliers and by contrast they offer other different benefits to smaller suppliers such as those described above.

So the question is whether the size of a risk management provider would be a factor in your choice of supplier? Indeed, does size really matter? 

As a medium-sized risk provider, RVM Fleet Services tries to offer you all the advantages you could gain from dealing with one and yet, with none of the drawbacks of dealing with the other!  In other words, we can offer flexible, personalised, specialist and responsive services at prices you might only expect to be available from the biggest providers.

So, why not look at whether RVM might be a more perfect fit for you. 

Find out more about our unique benefits on www.rvmfleetservices.co.uk or contact us now to see how we can help you!

Driver Incentives v Disincentives as Tools for Accident Reduction

Many fleets will support an accident reduction strategy with either driver incentive schemes or penalties for failing to meet new targets.  So just how effective are such measures in reducing claims and which approach works best?

A Policy for Dishonesty?

Incentives and disincentives can both have the effect of driving claims underground if they are too heavy-handed. By financially rewarding collision free driving you may encourage drivers to stop reporting small bumps. Drivers who face financial penalties for accident claims are arguably even more likely to withhold information.

Carrots and Sticks

The decision fleets must make is whether their drivers will be more likely to abide by culture change and act on the knowledge gained through training if there is a carrot in front of them or a stick behind. At RVM we believe carrots often have a greater influence on driver behaviour because they accentuate the positive but we also know that to be truly effective drivers need to understand why they are being incentivised. Once they grasp the business reasons and safety benefits of accident reduction they will be motivated by more than just the short term prize.

The Right Carrot

Like all incentives, driver rewards must be meaningful or they will simply be ignored. Popular incentives include cash bonuses, vouchers, eligibility for a vehicle upgrade or just recognition of good behaviour with the potential for a “driver of the year” badge of honour. In many cases, introducing an element of competition amongst employees can work extremely well and most fleets find that longer term goals are more successful and make it easier to measure improvements over time.

Act Now

Driver incentives not only help to set a pattern of positive behaviour, they also encourage employees to see improvement as a goal and to share their successes with one another. This in itself helps to perpetuate good driving principles. However, incentive schemes need to be designed to fit the fleet and whereas a leader table may work in a fleet where all drivers perform similar roles, other organisations may need a different system with rewards designed to match specific roles or achievements.

Click here if you need help designing an incentive scheme for your fleet?  

or Call RVM today on 0113224 8888 to discuss in more detail.