Car insurance more expensive for unemployed

Flying_Tiger_2

---

dacouch

You're forgetting the third type of unemployed, significantly smaller but very undesirable to an Insurer which is criminals who will often claim JSA to show an income should the police ever enquire or may not claim JSA but will normally declare themselves as unemployed to an insurer.

Insurers go by what each type of risk ultimately costs them which is reflected in the price, judging by the amount of Insurer who load for the unemployed, it would correlate with them costing more in claims.

whatmichaelsays

It's not a case of "charging the unemployed more" and yet again, Martin Lewis goes for the hysterical, headline grabbing "it's not fair" statement.

Insurers are simply pricing according to the perceived risk, as they do with every customer that they quote. If the unemployed statistically pose a greater risk, then it's no different to assessing the risk of every other customer, be it on age, gender, occupation, postcode, etc and charging accordingly.

mikey72

whatmichaelsays wrote: »

It's not a case of "charging the unemployed more" and yet again, Martin Lewis goes for the hysterical, headline grabbing "it's not fair" statement.

Insurers are simply pricing according to the perceived risk, as they do with every customer that they quote. If the unemployed statistically pose a greater risk, then it's no different to assessing the risk of every other customer, be it on age, gender, occupation, postcode, etc and charging accordingly.

"charging the unemployed more"

"the unemployed statistically pose a greater risk"

actually is the same thing.

The spin depends on which side of the fence you're on.

jessiesmith

Yes, and as for the unemployed. Well, the joblessness rate is going down, but at a snail's pace. The job market is still sharply aggressive. So job-hunters have to employ ever edge to draw in the interest of prospective employers. I guess an effective resume is the best way to get in the door. But if the search has been irritating, perhaps your resume needs to be "refreshed." Article source: Refresh your resume to improve job search.

InsideInsurance

mikey72 wrote: »

"charging the unemployed more"

"the unemployed statistically pose a greater risk"

actually is the same thing.

The spin depends on which side of the fence you're on.

Yes, but the real spin and the bit that is more contentious is the statement "it is unfair" as that flies in the face of the statement that they pose a greater risk.

If you do not charge those a greater risk more then you are being unfair to everyone else who has to carry higher premiums as to protect the common pool.

Of cause, those that just wanting to make headlines dont actually come forward with a suggestion as saying everyone should pay an extra £X a year so unemployed dont have to have a loading doesnt make you sound as much as a consumer champion.

mikey72

It's the insurers that need to be more transparent to refute the claims effectively.
The problem with claiming to know all the stats for the risks, but then to also claim it's commercially sensitive, also looks like it's being hidden for other dubious reasons.
All insurers must have similar data, the customers don't change, so the only the reaon it can be "commercially sensitive" is it'll give the public the information to check the insurers claims that the young cost more, the unemployed cost cost, men cost more etc.
So we do tend to think, if they won't let us check, how true are the the statements, and how much is down to how the statistics are presented?

InsideInsurance

Even if they wanted to be fully open, which I agree they dont, they would have data protection issues as whilst names dont need to be disclosed the amount of data that does would allow individuals to be identified. There are 8 houses with the same postcode as ours, all have different make/models of cars so if the data is published I could tell what claims, convictions and disabilities they all have.

Whilst all insurers do have their own data set they will not all have the same experiences. Many post codes only have a dozen or less dwellings in them and with the number of different insurers out there many will have little or not data for that postcode let alone have it for employed/ unemployed/ retired/ student, married/single/divorced. Having open access to your larger competitors data would be a dream come true for smaller insurers or new insurers.

Ultimately insurance pricing is a combination of risk and commercial considerations. Again giving open access to your risk information would allow other insurers calculate the commercial decisions their competitors are making. No other industry is required to share equivalent data such as suppliers parts costs etc

Insurers could, and do, release calculated results but then people claim that you can prove anything you want with statistics.

Lapadore16

Hi
Does anybody know of a multi insurance policy that insures car, house, and pet, car breakdown etc., I have just been trying to find out what the costs will be this year before the renewals come in, and it is a mine field.
I have decided not to have contents insurance any more as they always seem to have an excuse if you ring up to claim for something. It is never covered. I can't see the point of paying for nothing.
I realise we have to have buildings cover and with vet fees getting ever higher, pet insurance is a must. Breakdown cover too for our cars but watch out that they don't charge an excess for every call out you make. Up to now Start Rescue seems the best without an excess.
Any advice would be appreciated.
Thanks.

InsideInsurance

Main advise is to start your own thread as unless you are unemployed it isnt relevant to this discussion

lisyloo

It is never covered.

Rubbish.

Any advice would be appreciated.

Try some decent insurers rather than alawys going for cheap rubbish ones.
Hiscox are very good for home insurance but could be more expensive.
But then you generally get what you pay for.