Car insurance help (blind in one eye after operation)

vaio

Yep, but do you think it’s fair if an insurance company loaded your premium even though DVLC say you meet the required standard?

Wyndham

vaio wrote: »

Yep, but do you think it’s fair if an insurance company loaded your premium even though DVLC say you meet the required standard?

No, I don't. That's kind of my point. The DVLA gave the OK, so the insurer should go with that.

My situation is very different to someone who has lost sight - this is how I've always seen the world, 'normal' sight would be a shock to me I think!

vaio

Yep, I agree, but further I’d say that even people like the OP who have recently lost (thankfully temporarily) the sight in one eye should not be loaded and I suspect that the DDA/Equalities Act makes it unlawful to do so just as it does with gender.

Basically, if you pass the DVLC requirements that should be it and any loading should be reactive rather than proactive.

lisyloo

yep, but I don't really see why adapting to loss of vision in one eye is is restricted to those who suffered in childhood.

If you have a problem when your body/brain is actually developing then it can make a big difference.
For example if you have a "lazy" eye then this can be fixed in childhood with an eye patch, forcing the brain to use that eye.
Later in life once the brain has learned to disregard the output from one eye, it cannot be fixed (my OH has one that was not caught early enough).
So yes, there is a diffference between coping with an impairment whilst your body and brain are developing and coping with certain impairements as an adult.

Yorkie1

vaio wrote: »

Yep, I agree, but further I’d say that even people like the OP who have recently lost (thankfully temporarily) the sight in one eye should not be loaded and I suspect that the DDA/Equalities Act makes it unlawful to do so just as it does with gender.

Basically, if you pass the DVLC requirements that should be it and any loading should be reactive rather than proactive.

Without disputing the general thrust of your thread, as previously stated, the EAct will not apply to the OP because he does not meet the definition of disability in the EA as his condition is (I agree thankfully) only temporary and short-lived in duration.