Women face hike in car insurance premiums

PasturesNew

Fit a black box to all cars and get charged monthly based on the stats transmitted from the boxes; speeds, braking, volume of stereo ... could all be recorded and create your next month's premium.

diable

The insurance companies will just move from gender analysis to risk analysis based on age and demographics unless they want to screw people over.

I suppose the next stage will be life insurance for smokers and non smokers and the retirement age to be equal but the best one would be to equal out the divorce laws and the automatic right of the mother to win custody of the children in a divorce.

thor

Insurance companies will use this as just another excuse to increase their margins. Like most people I believe men will not see any reduction at all.

roddydogs

Will they now stop online quotes being lower than phone quotes now as well?

SingleSue

I have always thought that car insurance should be done on risk rather than sex.....and if statistically, young men are more likely to have an accident, then ergo they are more risk.

Saying that though, the driving of some young woman does leave a lot to be desired, just recently, I have seen more girl racers burning up the sea front than boy racers!

Then you get boring drivers like me who will see their premiums increase because of this....not even a parking ticket in 20 years of driving.

blueboy43

michaels wrote: »

Well presumably discrimination based on age will go next so everyone will pay more. The sad thing is that the general population and media types in particular are so innumerate hat they can not understand why this is a bad thing.

This will cause more road deaths - why? Currently the fact that younger male drivers pay a premium based on the level of risk prices some off the road, reducing premiums will increase the number who can afford to drive and thus with more higher risk drivers on the road there will be more fatal accidents.

It really is a shitty world we live in.

The logical (in the madcap European court sense) extension of this would mean an equal annuity rates for someone who is 60 and someone who is 70.

IronWolf

Theres no talk of this getting turned into a ageist thing, which would be absolute joke.

lostinrates

Its an extention of something that I've been watching increase since I was young...you confusion of ''fairness'' with ''same''. I actually agree with Sue...there are really a lot of girl racers about now, and neither sex is increasing in their capacity to think and it seems to me has lost a great deal of wisdom they should be receiving from us...goodness knows I don't have any to pass down. A more sensible measure of ''same'' would have been to restrict 1st named driver basis to very small engined cars for both (second named driver might be needed for work vehicles, shared family cars etc etc).

Now that its agreed we have to have the same treatment whch nice young man is going to step forward for an injection of PMS irrationality and tearfulness before a commute? Isn't it a shame that ''being equal'' won't extend to biological function? Its just incredibly stupid, this confusion over the true meaning of ''equality''.

Procrastinator333

blueboy43 wrote: »

The logical (in the madcap European court sense) extension of this would mean an equal annuity rates for someone who is 60 and someone who is 70.

And take that to the next logical step. You have your pension pot, your pot of X buys you the same annuity and income at 55 as it does at 75. To get value for money you will either have to buy the annuity at 55 or wait and use drawdown.

The_Fox_3

I really cannot see the problem, if it could be proved that white drivers were safer and had less accidents than black drivers does any think it would then be right to make black drivers insurance more expensive.:)

Fox


p.s if you are BNP i already know your answer