Google’s second-half results have come under fire for failing to list the best and worst second-generation cars, while third-party websites have also made disparaging comparisons between the brands.
In addition, the company has been criticised for not updating its car and vehicle insurance database regularly.
But it is likely that most people are not going to be aware of the differences between the two types of insurance and will assume that a secondhand car is the best choice.
So what is second-handed care?
First-hand cars have an advantage over second-gen cars in terms of their durability and longevity, as they are not affected by the climate of the car or the conditions of the home.
This also means that they are less likely to become covered by claims if a car is lost or damaged, although they are still required to provide for a replacement if the vehicle is damaged beyond repair.
Second-hand vehicles are also cheaper to insure, as their owners do not need to pay for repairs to the vehicle, so they can be sold at an affordable price.
Secondhand cars are also more accessible than second-hands.
Although most people can afford a second home, a second house can be a much cheaper and quicker alternative, and can be built in a cheaper time than a second car.
Second homes also provide a number of advantages over first-hand homes, including the possibility to live independently, while they are in a home, for example.
Second houses also often offer a larger number of bedrooms and larger kitchens, allowing for more entertaining space.
Third-party comparisonsThere have been a number a third-parties making comparisons between second-and third-hand insurance, and some have been even more inaccurate than Google’s results.
These include companies like AutoInsuranceComparison.com, who have compared second- and third-generation vehicles to third- and fourth-hand home insurance and have found the results to be misleading.
In a recent blog post, the group claims to have identified the “most misleading third-person comparison ever”, saying that the comparison of first- and second-owned vehicles was incorrect because it incorrectly assumed that a vehicle that is owned by two people would be “slightly less expensive”.
The group also claims to be able to calculate how much the two people cost to insure a second household against the two-vehicle household, and they found that “it turns out to be a lot less than it appears”.
These companies have also been criticised by the Insurance Regulatory Agency of Australia for their inaccurate third-word analysis, which is based on assumptions that first-year and second year buyers will not use the same vehicle and that it will cost less than a similar vehicle owned by a third person.
According to the group, a first-person insurance policy is a “faulty, often inaccurate, comparison of two vehicles, and has no relevance to the real world”.
Third-partys have also criticised the group’s secondhand insurance comparison for being “lacklustre and misleading”.
They say that the group has not provided any information on how it came to their “best guess” for how much a third party would pay for a second or third-owned vehicle.
In an emailed statement to Carscoop, Google said that it “looks forward to responding to our critics and will respond as quickly as we can to any further concerns that they raise.”
The Google-owned company said it was “committed to ensuring that our data is accurate and up-to date”.
“We take every opportunity to make our insurance offerings more accessible to people from all walks of life,” the statement continued.
“However, when it comes to comparing second- to third party coverage, we recognise that there are many questions we need to answer about the accuracy of our data, which we work hard to answer.”
Google said that its insurance comparison database would continue to improve, adding that it is “working with third- party insurance experts to improve our data”.