I received the following email from?Kyle Tower, one of the lead members of the Ticketfree team, responding to my earlier post on speeding insurance:
First off I would like to apologize for the delay in responding to your e-mail. Since Ticketfree was first ‘”discovered” a few weeks ago our team has been bombarded with phone calls and e-mails. This wouldn’t have been a big problem, except that I actually got married and was out of the country as it all began. Due primarily to the fact that Ticketfree is not quite ready to be released to the general public, and that finishing the site was the main priority, the rest of the Ticketfree team ceased answering the hundreds of calls we got a day, as well as sorting through
the mass of e-mails. As the site was discovered while we were still testing and working through the idea, we did not have the people in place to handle the volume of inquires we received…especially with myself out of the country. My goal however, is not to make excuses, but rather to address the article you wrote.
I should probably start by saying that I greatly respect the issues and opinions that you raised in the article. In regards to the moral hazard of promoting an increase in speeding, we would argue, as you also mentioned, that the persistent deterrent of demerits and insurance costs would still have their effect on controlling speeding. Furthermore, we recognize that for the most part, people don’t intentionally want to get a ticket. Even if they know that the ticket would be paid for, the average person is not likely to start driving recklessly just because they can. Some individuals may chose to do that, but for most people, they aren’t willing to jeopardize their life or other drivers’, just because they can get a ticket paid for. Finally, we would also object by saying that most drivers are creatures of habit. An individual who isn’t a reckless driver, but does tend to speed 50-60% of the time may continue to do so with a Ticketfree membership, but they are not likely to speed everywhere all the time, because they already have an established driving habit.
In regards to Ticketfree’s criminal liability in the case of an accident, I once again recognize your expertise in this manner. However, it is important to note that in the process of developing this business concept, we consulted a wide variety of traffic, insurance, and criminal lawyers to determine if Ticketfree could be prosecuted in a criminal case. I will not pretend to be a lawyer, but we were counseled to develop the terms and conditions you quoted in order to prevent such a prosecution from taking place. Furthermore, we informed that Ticketfree could not be
called in a tort lawsuit if a Ticketfree member was involved in a serious accident or some type of fatality while driving. This is as a result of what Ticketfree actually covers and assumes liability for, which is simply
the payment of a ticket. Again trying to explain this as best I can, without a lawyer to translate what they originally told us.
The feedback we have received via e-mails or by reading blogs and comments has been mixed. When myself and the group of people I work with began discussing the idea of Ticketfree several years ago, we wanted to explore the viability of this idea both from a business perspective, as well as a moral, social, and legal one. The goal has always been simple: To provide a profitable service for people that would allow them to just drive and not constantly be checking over their shoulder for a cop, or slamming on their brakes every time they see a car on the shoulder of the road, or a traffic light that looks like it might turn red soon. We look forward to opening our doors officially for new members in September, and would like to thank everyone who has been participating in the blog dialogue! 🙂