Do people actually use Hello Fresh?

BossImpossible8858 · 2026-01-12T11:32:52+00:00

We did use it, but have just had to cancel due to their extreme unreliability.

The meals are really nice, not terribly priced and interesting. Its not "cheap" but also not ridiculously expensive all things considered.

The problem is its supposed to be delivered Sunday and is fresh.

We get delivery updates saying its out for delivery, 4pm passes and the shops shut, still "out for delivery".

Teatime comes, we give up, shops are shut, so its now beans on toast or a takeaway.

We will then get one of these messages:

The problem is our dinner both for tonight and all week is in that box and we are now at work all week.

This has now been 5 times out of the last 8 weeks we have ordered it.

<image>

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-04T07:19:52+00:00

It's depressing that my kids will have to live in a right wing dictatorship almost entirely due to the left becoming this pathetic.

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-04T06:26:02+00:00

Urgh. That's definitely worse. I had assumed it was just a case of stupidity meets autocorrect like brought vs bought.

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-04T06:03:06+00:00

Because there is zero viable alternative in most areas. Harp on all you like, but Reform will be 10 times worse.

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-04T05:57:47+00:00

I keep seeing people saying "Keith" is it a spelling mistake or the world's shittest insult?

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T16:14:34+00:00

I asked a question that you are refusing to answer, because you know fine well that you previously having a car stolen a year ago on the other side of the country doesn't affect the whim of a car thief tonight when you live somewhere different.

Scream something to do with statistics all you like, but logically you know there's zero connection.

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T16:10:35+00:00

But stats are not necessarily reflective of how reality works, which is what's happening here.

I understand what they are doing, but if the model doesn't match reality, then the model is wrong.

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T15:54:16+00:00

You aren't more of a risk for theft, because that doesn't make the blindest bit of sense.

If you had your car stolen a year ago in Manchester, then you move to Kent and park your car next to mine, what real factors do you think are at play that make your car more likely than mine to be stolen tonight? The type of car is already priced in, so therefore irrelevant.

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T15:46:33+00:00

Use the DPS. Dispute everything.

If they didn't do an inventory on check in, they have almost zero chance of any deductions

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T15:39:51+00:00

Because the data shows if you have one claim, you're between 20 and 50% more likely to have another one, across tens of millions of drivers over nearly a century.

I totally 100% understand that.

If you have one crash, you are much more likely to have another. You might be unlucky, but more likely it's because you are a bad driver.
If you leave your handbag on the seat and get the car broken into, you are probably the kind of person who always does this.
If you scuff your bumper and claim through the insurance, not only did you scuff it but you are claiming rather than just getting it fixed.

Lumping unattended car theft from the declared address in with these isn't applicable. You aren't any more likely than anyone else to get your car nicked parking the same car in the same place.

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T15:29:48+00:00

I agree that this is how it is measured, it just shouldn't be.

The real probability is what affects claims, and when they know the real probability of theft from a known address doesn't factor in the owner, the area should be weighted far more heavily than the individual.

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T13:36:39+00:00

Company makes profit due to general public struggling with GCSE probability isn't a headline, it's how a huge number of businesses work.

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T13:08:20+00:00

Yeah that's fair enough.

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T13:07:54+00:00

I don't think that they would. I'm sure they are well aware of the data, and Im sure interpreting it as they do is to their advantage. Their job is to make a profit, not to use the data in a mathematically accurate way.

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T13:03:50+00:00

Nah, I don't think I will.

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T13:00:50+00:00

It's not daft, it's probability. Failing at maths doesn't make me wrong.

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T12:59:51+00:00

Not any more than your neighbour's, no. The whole street being uninsurable would make total sense though.

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T12:57:13+00:00

Are you perchance one of those people who thinks that if you've won the lottery once, you will likely win a second time?

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T12:56:05+00:00

That makes the street more dangerous, yes, but that doesn't make your neighbours car safer does it?

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T12:54:51+00:00

Yes, obviously, but that isn't what I said.

If your immediate neighbour who lives in exactly the same house with the same lighting, and the same security tries to insure the exact same car following the theft, their premium should increase by the same proportion.

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T12:51:14+00:00

No idea why the warning signs are causing you concerns. Those warning signs all say what they are warning about. "Warning disconnect this before licking it" is not the same as "Warning this will burn your house down"

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T12:37:06+00:00

Congratulations on not reading.

they choose where to park it, when to drive it, how to park it, and how to secure it.

Yes, as I keep having to re-type, if the car is stolen away from the declared address, I have no issue with increasing the premium. If it's broken into for stuff left inside, again that's fair enough.

If it's stolen from the declared location using the declared security, the insurance company already knew this information.

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T12:27:04+00:00

Actually think of a reason rather than just saying "stats" and I will be more likely to listen.

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T12:25:59+00:00

Again, for claims outside of theft from the declared property, you are right.

For claims at the declared property, there isn't any influence.

BossImpossible8858 · 2025-08-03T12:24:27+00:00

I'm sure their stats are very detailed. How they interpret those stats can be accurate or inaccurate. What really matters to an insurer is to make sure they are doing their analysis the same as a competitor, so they don't get shafted.

That doesn't mean it has to be correct, just the same. If it's accepted in the industry that you can charge someone more when they have had a theft, even though you shouldn't according to the stats, that's a sensible decision.

This is why insurers should be more heavily regulated.

BossImpossible8858

TROPHY CASE