Sexist Car insurance

Graham_Devon

inmypocketnottheirs wrote:

It just occurred to me whilst revisiting this thread, that I wonder how insurance premiums work in the US and Europe. I know from experience in Spain, Greece and the US it is not the person that is insured but the vehicle.

This means that any car can be driven by any person. Obviously the system in the UK means that insurers can squeeze the maximum premium out of drivers, by penalising them by age, endorsements, car type etc etc. I guess it could just be another example of rip of Britain?

This would be IMHO a MUCH better system. The hassle I have to go to each time I want to drive a different car is unbelievable.

Firstly I have 2 cars. One worth 16k, one worth 800 quid. The 16k one is a specialist car, which I use fairly often, but 20mpg isn't good for the commute to work. The 800 quid car is a 10yr old diesel which starts, drives, gets me anywhere i wanna go and cheaply.

To insure these I have to do the following:
- Insure the 16k car with my 5 years no claims
- Insure the 800 quid car as a 'new driver'.

In this country, insurance takes the pee when it comes to that. Why on earth can I not use my no claims on 2 vehicles. It is impossible that I can drive both at once.

Reason? Costs me nearly £600 a year to insure the 800 quid diesel as a 'new driver'. Costs me £350 to insure the 16k car with 5 years no claims.

It works out cheaper to have the 16k car using the no claims (3.2 litre V6 golf!).

When I come to driving my dad's car, I have to ring up, pay a £15 'admin' fee and then pay extortinate prices again as I can't use my no claims again.

It's ridiculous!

I'm_With_Stupid

Astaroth wrote:

But Tesco do give a discount to those that spent more in their store in the form of a clubcard and higher spenders getting better additional discount vouchers in addition to their earned club card points

Yes, and it's based on behaviour (i.e. how much you spend), in the same way that it's entirely acceptable to base insurance premiums on past claims and convictions. The give rewards to those individuals who spend the most. Tesco don't look at which age group or sex spends the most, then offer discounts on certain items just to that group (of course if they are clever with their marketing, they will offer discounts on products that are bought mainly by a particular group, and that would have much the same effect, but that's not the same as actually changing it's prices based on age).

inmypocketnottheirs

I don't need to do anything to back up my claims. Your comments are all your opinions. Mine are based on facts.

You can see for yourself how much it would cost to insure the same vehcile in the US by getting a quote on https://www.geicko.com. Then try with the same vehcile and driver details with morethan, directline, aa, anyone you like in fact and I will guarantee you that the UK is more expensive than the US.

As regards my claim that it is another example of rip off Britain, just relating to motoring try comparing the price in vehicles and servicing costs between here and the US.

Whether you like it or not, we are being s*****d over here. And insurance companies are just part of the system of squeezing every last drop out of motorists. Try getting a quote with a clean licence, and then see what different 3 points and a fixed penalty have. Just another excuse for them.

Otherwise, what other justification is there for cover being 50% cheaper in the US.

Have you seen the Corporate offices of any insurance company? Are they dingy little offices on run down industrial estates. No they are ivory towers in high rent districts. Do the senior executives have massive bonuses and pension benefits, driving fully expensed luxury cars? If I were running a 'loss making' business these are all issues I would look to address.

lisyloo

No, I'm saying that they should not be allowed to determine anything by age or sex, only by driving behaviour and records.

This is already a very substantial part of the system.
e.g. with some companies you can get up to 75% discount for having no claims.

What are you going to do about it to try and change the industry?
Or it is just a theorectical proposal to pass the time of day?

I'm_With_Stupid

gazza975526570 wrote:

Shoud they not rate premiums for older people higher than young for products such as Life Insurance as well then?

Even though again, statistically, the older you get the more likely you are to make a claim - ie in this instance to die? SHould therefore someone who is 20 pay the same as someone who is 80 the first time they take out life insurance for the first time?

It is rated on statistics- pure and simple.

I'm not as familiar with life insurance as car insurance, so I'm not claiming to have a clue how it works. But it would seem to me that they would take into account the persons lifestyle and previous health problems, and so the vast majority of 80 year olds would never be able to match a 20 year old anyway when it came to risk. But yes, all other factors equal, they should pay the same. Even if it means overall premiums went up for everyone, it would be better than a system based on age discrimination, yes.

Astaroth

Graham_Devon wrote:

This would be IMHO a MUCH better system. The hassle I have to go to each time I want to drive a different car is unbelievable.

I am confused why you think that insuring the car and not the drivers would make your life easier? From what you say it sounds more like you would want a any vehicle policy rather than an any driver.

Any drivers policies do exist in the UK and you could ask all these people whos vehicle you say you want to be able to drive to get this type of policy but because it means anyone from a 40 year old woman with 22 years no claims discount and clean licence to a 25 year old with 6 points and 10 accidents can drive the car it puts the premiums up.

Remember also that most the continent does not use a no claims discount scheme... so you complain about not being able to use it on more than 1 vehicle how bout not having any at all? Therefore no option to get protection on it either.

gazza975526570

I'm_With_Stupid wrote:

I'm not as familiar with life insurance as car insurance, so I'm not claiming to have a clue how it works. But it would seem to me that they would take into account the persons lifestyle and previous health problems, and so the vast majority of 80 year olds would never be able to match a 20 year old anyway when it came to risk. But yes, all other factors equal, they should pay the same. Even if it means overall premiums went up for everyone, it would be better than a system based on age discrimination, yes.

But then younger people would be subsidising the older people who are more likely to need to claim. Isnt this an even worse scenario???

I'm_With_Stupid

lisyloo wrote:

This is already a very substantial part of the system.
e.g. with some companies you can get up to 75% discount for having no claims.

What are you going to do about it to try and change the industry?
Or it is just a theorectical proposal to pass the time of day?

Oh wow, it's working again. Does this website keep breaking for other people?

Anyway, I'm saying that I believe that being able to use age or sex as a factor in determining the price of the insurance quote should be made illegal, and I think at least the sex one nearly was, so plenty of people must agree with me. I'm just having a debate on a forum to pass the time and maybe learn something. But yes, I would support any campaign to make it illegal for car insurance companies to do this.

Astaroth

inmypocketnottheirs wrote:

I don't need to do anything to back up my claims. Your comments are all your opinions. Mine are based on facts.

Facts that you seem unable to substantiate against facts provided by well known and reputable sources which are to the exact contrary to what you say.

The big difference with USA insurance is the fact there are fairly low limits to the cover. The highest cover I could find from the site you linked to was £100,000 of property damage and £300,000 of injury (to third parties) plus further low limits on other elements of TP claims. Back in my claims days every case in my portfolio would have exceeded one or both of these limits.

Under my UK policy I have unlimited cover for both and yet the USA policy is $1234.80 and my UK policy is £553.40 and includes legal expenses insurance which wasnt an option to be added.

Astaroth

I'm_With_Stupid wrote:

age or sex as a factor in determining the price of the insurance quote should be made illegal

Statistically they are proven to affect the average claim more than where you live or what car you have. Why not therefore go the whole hog and simply charge everyone £750 a year irrespective of any criteria?