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
It would be great to hear from an insurance person, but according to the person who presented to my university class a decade ago, it’s about the person who chooses to drive a red vehicle.
The way he explained it, there is a correlation between choosing to drive a red vehicle and accidents. So, their insurance is higher. The general idea is that people driving red cars drive faster and are more reckless. But it’s all about the person who chooses red, not the vehicle color itself resulting in more accidents.
Downside is being a person who drives a red vehicle because it’s easier to find with the bright and less common color.
Edit: see comment for actual knowledgeable person below, vehicle color isn’t factored into price of insurance.
Latest Answers