Admiral insurance backdating insurance premium

mikey72

I don't need to try to guess reasons to justify it. That's up to the insurer to prove to the FOS, and show they're treating the customer fairly. If they are, they can prove it, and they'll be fine. If they can't hopefully someone will pick up the disability, and they'll be punatively fined.

dunstonh

. That's up to the insurer to prove to the FOS, and show they're treating the customer fairly.

No its not. The FOS do not get involved in commercial issues.

If they are, they can prove it, and they'll be fine.

They wont have to prove anything and indeed, they will not even be asked.

If they can't hopefully someone will pick up the disability, and they'll be punatively fined.

On what basis would they be fined?

vaio

vaio wrote: »

I thought disability discrimination was the same as gender, ie they can't load based on population statistics, only on individual statistics ie history.

That being the case there is possibly an argument that any loading on auto licences is indirectly discriminatory as disabled people are over represented in that group

dacouch wrote: »

They can load for disability providing their own date shows the increased risk.

At the moment they can but then again 3 years ago they could load on the basis of population stats in terms of gender and 40 years ago they could do it on skin colour. The courts have sorted those out and sooner or later they'll get round to looking at disability too

dacouch

vaio wrote: »

At the moment they can but then again 3 years ago they could load on the basis of population stats in terms of gender and 40 years ago they could do it on skin colour. The courts have sorted those out and sooner or later they'll get round to looking at disability too

The recent change in law to gender discrimination with regard to Insurance was an European ruling. The DDA law is a UK drafted law, if it was drafted in a similar way to the gender law, the impact on premiums for life and especially travel insurance would have a large impact on premiums

The law gives a specific exemption to Insurers for disability.

"The DDA and insurance

The DDA makes a specific exemption for providers of insurance. That is the person or company offering the insurance, not the broker or any other intermediate person. Insurance providers are allowed to provide insurance to a person with a disability on less favourable terms. This is provided that the difference is based on relevant evidence from a reasonable source and that the difference is reasonable. In practice, companies may charge you more for insurance if there is evidence that the illness you have puts you at a higher risk of making a claim. The evidence they use is not necessarily specific to you but from research undertaken by other parties.18

Example -

You may have to pay more for life insurance if you have severe mental illness because evidence shows that people with severe mental illness have a shorter life expectancy.
10

Most insurance companies do not cover existing conditions on general policies. This is because it can be difficult to decide whether something has happened as a result of a person's existing condition, or if a person has recovered and when they are no longer considered to be affected by the condition.
Many people have difficulty in buying common forms of insurance such as travel or motor insurance. Often if you declare that you have a severe mental health problem you will have to provide additional information and pay a higher premium. However, policies vary between companies and you should shop around to get the best terms.

For further information, please see the Rethink Advice & Information Service factsheet 'Insurance'. This can be downloaded for free from https://www.rethink.org/factsheets or you can receive a copy by contacting the Rethink Advice & Information Service (contact details are at the end of this factsheet)."

http://www.rethink.org/document.rm?id=699

vaio

All very true I'm sure but s45 of the original UK sex discrimination act had very similar wording to DDA re insurance

Disability discrimination

21(1)It is not a contravention of section 29, so far as relating to disability discrimination, to do anything in connection with insurance business if—
(a)that thing is done by reference to information that is both relevant to the assessment of the risk to be insured and from a source on which it is reasonable to rely, and
(b)it is reasonable to do that thing....

Sex discrimination

45. Insurance etc.
Nothing in Parts II to IV shall render unlawful the treatment of a person in relation to an annuity, life assurance policy, accident insurance policy, or similar matter involving the assessment of risk, where the treatment—
(a)was effected by reference to actuarial or other data from a source on which it was reasonable to rely, and
(b)was reasonable having regard to the data and any other relevant factors....

the european courts have ruled that gender discrimination on population statistics rather than individual history is unlawful and I see no reason to suppose they'll rule any differently when someone takes disability discrimination to them for a ruling