MSE News: Drivers face soaring car insurance costs

raskazz

Percy1983 wrote: »

So would it be racist or them to start collecting data so it can effect the future?

As I said before why not measure how tall people as well, if theres a pattern charge for it.

How about inside leg measurement, charge for it.

Yes there may sound silly, but both could potentially effect a drivers ability so why not, if you are going to say I am the same as all other 27 years old males why not say I am the same as all with the same height and leg measurement as well?

It is very silly. Insurers would not waste time and money collecting data for which there is not even a theoretical basis for premium rating. They would have to spend money on altering their web sites (and persuading aggregators to ask the same additional questions), then wait for several months/years before the data became useful. Insurers also endeavour to minimise the question set as a longer question set equals fewer completed quotes equals a lower conversion of website hits to policies taken out.

mikey72

Despite Raskazz beating his drum on how things should never change, and despite me posting that there are other costs even through the insurer is happy to charge me £75 on top of the premium, and 17 year olds need to pay £2500, he always chooses to ignore it in this thread, and complain how it's not fair to scrutinise the figures, there are other forces that may be having a say.
(Raskazz's favourite site as well at the moment)
http://www.actuaries.org.uk/news/press-releases/articles/eu-gender-equality-legislation-could-lead-inequality-provision-insuranc

They don't like the news, and obviously, it isn't fair!

Arg

I don't see why they're complaining when all they'll do is even out the prices.

raskazz wrote: »

Which countries in particular?

Australia or canada for example,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_insurance#Australia
Although what we should be asking is what can be done to remove, lower costs and cut out the middlemen.

Because there is no statistical evidence of any correlation between ethicity and motor risk,

If they wanted the statistics I'm sure they could get or twist them to suit themselves.

therefore to attempt to use ethnicity as a basis for differential terms/premiums would be a breach of the Race Relations Act.

Why didn't you say so,we could have got straight to the point a few posts ago and ironicly it puts discrimination back on the table when it comes to insurance.

Quote

raskazz wrote: »

...you don't seem to understand how insurance works.

Amen to that.

darich

Dan_Smith wrote: »

I think some people have completely missed the point on sex discrimination..

The problem I have with premiums based on your sex is that most insurers assume that EVERY woman driver is a safer risk than men.

For example I could be claim free for years and yet a woman driver with the same experience, car, occupation, etc as me BUT he has an at fault claim can still end up paying less than me! Fair? I think not!

Premiums should be based more on driving experience (mainly how many at fault claims you've made) and not whether you have a penis!

As for age discrimination I agree insurers have a right to charge more here, due to the fact young drivers are OVERALL (whether male or female) are a higher risk than older drivers. Also with age (and driving experience) your premiums can drop eventually which seems fair.

Punish the bad drivers who have many at fault claims, reward the claim free drivers regardless of sex!

I think some people have completely missed the point on age discrimination..

The problem I have with premiums based on your ageis that most insurers assume that EVERY older driver is a safer risk than a younger one.

For example I could be a young driver with 3 years no claims yet an older driver with the same experience, car, occupation, etc as me BUT she has an at fault claim can still end up paying less than me! Fair? I think not!

Premiums should be based more on age (mainly how many at fault claims you've made) and not how old you are

As for sex discrimination I agree insurers have a right to charge more here, due to the fact male drivers are OVERALL (whether young or old) are a higher risk than female drivers. Also with age (and driving experience) your premiums can drop eventually which seems fair.

Punish the bad drivers who have many at fault claims, reward the claim free drivers regardless of age!

See how pointless your arguement is??
Did you actually read it before you posted?
You don't like generalisation of male and higher risk v female and lower risk but you're quite happy with the young and high risk v old and low risk generalisation?

dunstonh

The problem I have with premiums based on your ageis that most insurers assume that EVERY older driver is a safer risk than a younger one.

It assumes that statistically as a pool of individuals that they are more likely to be a safer risk based on claims data.

There will always be exceptions to that but you have to go by the averages and the claim data.

vaio

castle96 wrote: »

I remember insuring my first 'car' 2.8 Austin Champ/'Jeep',, at 18, 40 yrs ago, for £48pa (same price/class as Morris Minor. How things have changed !

dunstonh wrote: »

........Wouldnt that make it more expensive in real terms than the insurance prices today? (i havent got a real price calc to hand but it cant be that far off).

Don't know about "real price" but certainly in terms of wages it's gone up dramatically.

As an apprentice back in 1974 my insurance for a GT Cortina was £40 which was about two weeks wages.

Four or five years ago our apprentice was paying £1500 to insure a Rover 25, this was about three months wages and, looking at the figures people are posting for current quotes, an apprentice now would be working for maybe six months just to pay his insurance.

Fast approaching (if not there already) the stage where only kids with rich parents will be able to insure cars

BigCraigJohn

Have to admit I couldnt believe some of the quotes Ive been seeing on what I'd say were naff at best cars. How do new drivers get experience if they can't afford to drive?. I've been driving 12 years and in that time fuel has more than doubled swell as tax going up a good bit. My first car was a mk2 golf gti, extremely high risk yet at 18 I was only paying £850 a year I imagine now you would be talking £2500 if you could find anyone to insure you.
My license was spotless till 29 so I think we become worse drivers with age if anything(well that's just me). I think a lot of it is very wrong tbh.

BigCraigJohn

Have to admit I couldnt believe some of the quotes Ive been seeing on what I'd say were naff at best cars. How do new drivers get experience if they can't afford to drive?. I've been driving 12 years and in that time fuel has more than doubled aswell as tax going up a good bit. My first car was a mk2 golf gti, extremely high risk yet at 18 I was only paying £850 a year I imagine now you would be talking £2500 if you could find anyone to insure you.
My license was spotless till 29 so I think we become worse drivers with age if anything(well that's just me). I think a lot of it is very wrong tbh.

charlearose

Reading this is interesting as my step son has bought a bike due to the cost of car insurance last year it was 900 now they want 2500

what i find unreal is that unless he takes a motorbike test he is restricted to driving a 125 bike and every two years he has to retake his cbt he is not allowed to drive on the motorways if he want to carry on driving he has to keep doing his cbt test every two years

so why not something similar for cars and the car test

ie 17 take your test your restricted for 2 years to a 1 litre car plus you cant drive on motorway and have to have L Sign on the car
maybe even you cant drive between 11pm and 5am

1 or 2 years later you will be more experienced so you have to retake your test but its just a general saftey test and general knowledgte and motorway driving and if you pass you can now drive on motorways and drive a larger engine


in between that time if you f... up crash break the law ect then you have to start again from scratch inc the theory