MSE News: Insurance costs to soar as gender discrimination banned

Percy1983

huckster wrote: »

The Insurers will try their hardest to find ways other than gender, to make the premium relevant to the risk.

Exactly the point, they can't blame all males for the actions of some males anymore so they will have to target the bad drivers using fairer methods than splitting the population into 2 groups and saying all within each group are the same as each other.

As I say, I have as much in common with the average boy racer as any other sensible driver... nothing, but because I share similar features with them I should pay while a sensible female driver doesn't? Yes neither myself or a sensible female driver should pay for these twits but if the cost needs to be covered why not distribute it over all of us rather than 1 half of us?

Arg

lisyloo wrote: »

NO WAY.
If you want to drive tons of metal round the streets at speed high enough to kill people you should get insurance so that they can be adequately compesated at least for medical treatment, injuries and on-going costs that might affect them for the rest of their life.

The point is that it's not YOUR risk to take.
You are taking a risk with other people's lives the minute you start driving.

Most people manage to drive around just fine and we have the NHS to deal with injuries and the police to deal with joyriders.

Someone mentioned what happens if their £20k car got damaged.There is nothing to stop you insuring it yourself.

paulfelce

huckster wrote: »

Can't believe this thread is still going on.



I cannot see that the Insurers will simply increase the premium of younger women by an average of 25%. The Insurers will try their hardest to find ways other than gender, to make the premium relevant to the risk.

I reckon they'll start doing it on name. A Samuel might find their insurance more expensive than a Samantha. Lord knows what an Ayrton will have to pay!

I wonder if I can claim back on previous premiums under the discrimation law......

morrisjcql

On the subject of car insurance. If we are to obey these instuctions regarding insurance discrimination then what next? On this logic you might as well just ignore everything and start with an even playing field for all and the only way to reduce premiums would be by no claims bonus alone. Actuaries beware! despite being one of the most difficult jobs to qualify for globally it would seem you are heading down the redundancy road if common sense does not resume.

starrystarry

Arg wrote: »

Most people manage to drive around just fine and we have the NHS to deal with injuries and the police to deal with joyriders.

Someone mentioned what happens if their £20k car got damaged.There is nothing to stop you insuring it yourself.

Missing the point entirely. It is insured of course. But that doesn't mean that anybody else should be able to choose whether to have insurance. If my car gets damaged or written off by someone else, or I get injured, then they must have the means to immediately reimburse whatever my costs are. The only way we can make sure that happens is by compulsory insurance for all. Any other suggestions are just ridiculous.

Percy1983

Why is it so ridiculous that we all just insure ourselves if we choose too?

starrystarry

Percy1983 wrote: »

Why is it so ridiculous that we all just insure ourselves if we choose too?

And what do you suggest I do if my car is written off by some skint person who chose not to have insurance? Accept a fiver a week until it's paid off? Claim on my own insurance that I've forked out for while the other person was frittering away the money on something else? Accept that I've lost my car and have to start again from scratch?

In what way are any of those outcomes fair?

Percy1983

If you chose to insure your car it gets fixed... no problem.

starrystarry

Percy1983 wrote: »

If you chose to insure you car it gets fixed... no problem.

I give up with you Percy. You appear to be of limited intelligence. I suggest you apply for a job with the ECJ, you'd fit right in.

lisyloo

Maybe this is where my problem lies I believe people should just insure themselves and the whole blame element should be removed from insurance eg:

Morally I don't agree.
If (for example) you hit a poor person (child, student, pensioner, homeless) then they might not have been able to insure themselves.

Secondly this is not only about insurance.
It's about legal liability. Insurance is merely a mechanism for settling the bill.
You are talking about disagreeing with the fundamentals of our legal system.
You are of course entitlted to your opinion, but I am pointing out that it is much bigger than just car insurance.

If I slip on your driveway because you left a pothole there then YOU are liable.
If you have insurance to pay then great, if you don't I can sue you and if you have money I can get a court order and get the balliffs in or get an attachements to your earnings.
So it's not about cars, or insurance, it's about legal liability you disgree with.

Likewise I get life insurance etc and somebody crashes into me and puts me in a wheel chair my insurance covers me... simple...

What about all the people that cannot afford insurance?
Why also should other people insure themselve against your inherently dangerous optional forms of transport?

That way we all way up the risks to us and insure what we want and if we don't have insurance that is our problem for not getting insurance.

And all those pensioners, students who can't afford it............well tough??

In short I am happy to take responsibility to anything which might happen to me.

Yes, but you are fortunate enough to afford it.
You are saying "tough" to all the people that can't even though you want to indulge in inherently dangerous activities and put other people's life and limb at risk.

Yes I know it can't work like that (mostly because the current system is so ingrained, not because it can't work)

You haven't convinced me how it would work for all the people that can't afford it the insurance.
But it's not just ingrained, it's fundamentally our legal system.
You don't have to agree, but legal liability is much bigger than just driving and much bigger than insurance.
It applies to everything - your hojme, your work, everything you do.
You are liable if you cause someone damage through your own negligence and you have make redress.
That's quite fundamental, but of course, I respect your right to disagree with it.
But you've failed to convince me that it works for the poor, only for those wealthy enough to insure themselves.