We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Sexist Car insurance
Comments
-
I used to work at Diamond which is part of admiral.
All insurance companies have an "Ideal Customer" this is the customer that will get the best quote and hopefully become a long term customer.
Diamonds ideal customer is:
Female 25, Living in London/SE England - Drives a 2004 Mini Cooper with optional Pepper Pack, Works as an Office/Insurance Clerk 40 hours a week. Non smoker and 3 Years NCB.
Simple as that! If your not Diamonds ideal customer then look elsewhere - And that includes Women too because very few girls will get a fantastic quote - However, there are companies that cater for all possible markets and if you dont succeed then keep ringing around.
Its not vey highly known but there are So called Black/Asian Insurers and Men only insurers. The only reason the women only insurer is so well known is because the Halifax (Who own Shielas Wheels) took a gamble to advertise an launch back a few years now. It works at the moment but it wont last because the business model is based on an old fashioned view of women as vocational and statistical persons and its a bubble thats currently being burst.
You see the notion of women being better drivers is based on an old fashioned 1970's or 1980's Insurance view:
Women are housewifes and drive very little and with no other stress eg:Sales Reps trying to get to appointment etc
Women work less and are in less value jobs and thus carry less risk eg:Oil Rig Worker, Doorman, Politician, Journalist, Policeman etc etc....
Women tend to drive lower performance cars and bare in mind that the term "Girl Racer" and the notion of "Career Women" didnt exist in the 70's 80's
As you can see some of these statements are actually quote sexist and if you ask the top insurance brass up at Diamond/S Wheels they will tell you that the current way the insurance industry deals with female quotes is not sustainable due to womens roles in life changing.
Currently women have an accident rate of 44% and men have 56%. It used to be alot more and thats not because women are getting worse at driving at all, it purely means that womens roles in life both vocational and social are now as challenging and demanding as mens and as a result they now carry a very similar risk. The insurance industry anticipates that the Accident rate will even out by 2010.
Hope that helps! - So dont assume these companies are being sexist - its just business, the next big thing will come along after Womens only insurance and this will all be forgotten about - Thats business!
Happy New Year - Off to get drunk now.0 -
But the thread asked whether these 'female only' insurers were, or should be, illegal.
My view is that they are gimmicks and should be illegal under sex discrimination laws. Anybody using such companies should be embarrassed.
GGThere are 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary and those that don't.0 -
I concur with GG. Sexist without a doubt, if the shoe was on the other foot and the companies were saying they'd only accept men because women can't drive we would have an uproar from the female equality, tree hugging, lesbian tofu eating community.
Imagine if it was Blacks or asians that they didn't want to insure! I can here the PC cries now.0 -
djgrazy wrote:we would have an uproar from the female equality, tree hugging, lesbian tofu eating community.
Where as it stands we just have to put up with poorly worded and argued generalisations from men who can't handle the fact that they could just possibly be more of an insurance risk :rolleyes:"One day I realised that when you are lying in your grave, it's no good saying, "I was too shy, too frightened."
Because by then you've blown your chances. That's it."0 -
djgrazy wrote:I concur with GG. Sexist without a doubt, if the shoe was on the other foot and the companies were saying they'd only accept men because women can't drive we would have an uproar from the female equality, tree hugging, lesbian tofu eating community.
Imagine if it was Blacks or asians that they didn't want to insure! I can here the PC cries now.
Eat TOFU !!!! Urgh, that's disgusting. It shouldn't be allowed !
0 -
I have often wondered if, as is rumoured, most accidents happen within 5 miles of home, and as a sweeping generalisation, women drive less miles than men, how can the claim that women are safer drivers than men hold water?Don't lie, thieve, cheat or steal. The Government do not like the competition.
The Lord Giveth and the Government Taketh Away.
I'm sorry, I don't apologise. That's just the way I am. Homer (Simpson)0 -
Imagine if it was Blacks or asians that they didn't want to insure! I can here the PC cries now.
The colour of your skin does not affect your likelihood of having accidents.
So if anyone were to implement such a business model (unlikely I think) then it would be purely racially motivated.
Your gender does currently affect your likelihood of having accidents.
Insurance is based on a number of "rules" that indicate how good or bad a risk you are.
These include not only gender but age, postcode, experience etc.
Currently this is all quite legal.
If it becomes illegal to discriminate in this way then be aware that you may end up paying a lot more on various insurances.
e.g. If you live in a "nice" postcode area and it became illegal to discriminate then you would have to pay more to subsidise people who live in "bad" areas.
The whole pricing model with insurance in that the higher risk you are the more you pay.
Gender is only ONE factor out of many so I think this is being blown out of proportion.
If you want to reduce your premium then there are a number of other things you can control such as your choice of vehicle.0 -
mrcow wrote:Where as it stands we just have to put up with poorly worded and argued generalisations from men who can't handle the fact that they could just possibly be more of an insurance risk :rolleyes:
I don't have a problem with men paying more because of the perceived (or otherwise) increased risk. However, to refuse to insure men is irrational (nail hitting head moment!).
Most men should be happy to pay a bit more, after all, we get paid more so can afford it.
GGThere are 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary and those that don't.0 -
lisyloo wrote:The colour of your skin does not affect your likelihood of having accidents.
So if anyone were to implement such a business model (unlikely I think) then it would be purely racially motivated.
How do you know? Has the data been collected and analysed? Perhaps white males are more prone to having accidents?
GGThere are 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary and those that don't.0 -
Gorgeous_George wrote:
Most men should be happy to pay a bit more, after all, we get paid more so can afford it.
:rotfl::rotfl:
This thread could run and run!!!"One day I realised that when you are lying in your grave, it's no good saying, "I was too shy, too frightened."
Because by then you've blown your chances. That's it."0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards

