I heard this statement and it confused me. The explanation was more red cars have accidents than other cars. But surely that doesn’t translate to “I personally am more likely to have an accident if I drive a red car than a blue car today”? Assuming there’s nothing inherently about red cars that makes them more likely to crash. I’m struggling with the maths theory behind it.
Edit to clarify my question: does the statistic that “red cars have more accidents” translate to the statement that “I, personally, all other things being equal, am more likely to have an accident if I drive a red car than a blue one”?
In: 10
This is completely false. I used to be an underwriter and this is not true, at all. There’s no insurance company that can back up any claim that red cars get into more accidents. That’s why they don’t ask for the color of your car.
If you had, for example, a red dodge viper and painted it white, there’s no difference. It is strictly based on:
1) driver
2) year make model
A) this is because the cost associated with fixing the vehicle
B) safety rating of the vehicle
Paint has 0 to do with it.
Latest Answers