Discrimination for being unemployed ?

Lum

Househusband or Carer would be the best options to put.

chrisw

My wife put down retired and after we'd taken out the policy we were bombarded with telephone calls from the insurance company wanting to know why she was retired at 44. It was on ill health grounds so we had to supply medical details even though none of them required DVLA notification (arthritis). So now she puts housewife, which is still true.

CrazyRed

Hi

In exactly the same boat as you, for exactly the same reasons (I'm nearly your age, too!).

Go to MoneySupermarket and get quotes from there - put in your occupation as "Carer-Non Professional".

As you've left work to care for your wife, this is totally legitimate and accurate as to your occupation and you will find that you will not be penalised in the premium.

You're NOT unemployed. Your 'job' is caring for your wife!

(My renewal, with my current company was over £1,000 "because you're not employed, sir". Best quote from the comparison site I mentioned was £432 so a massive, massive difference).

Lum

Think of all the stereotypes that the likes of the Daily Mail like to put about regarding unemployed people. The insurance will assume you'll be partying until 5AM, drinking Tesco Value Lager and with a 3 litre White Lightening chaser and then jumping in your car to go joyriding around the council estate listening to dubstep through a 3000W bass system that you haven't bothered to declare.

Yes we all know that this stereotype is a load of rubbish, except for a very small minority, but the insurers will tack on the risk of you being one of said minority.

Carer is a much better option.

motorguy

arcon5 wrote: »

Also with you declaring your status as unemployed they may see you as a higher risk with regards to getting the money on time each month.

You dont pay for your insurance monthly. You pay for it yearly.

You may well take out a payment scheme, but this is almost always with a third party, NOT the insurance company. They will get their money up front from the third party company. Therefore its very unlikely thats the reason.

It'll simply be down to statistics. Statistically they will have evidence that unemployed people in the O/P's area are more likely to have an accident. This may well be because they have more leisure time and perhaps they are seeing that most accidents happen in leisure time - after all, if you're at work in an office or factory, you cant be driving your car.

arcon5

pgilc1 wrote: »

You dont pay for your insurance monthly. You pay for it yearly.

You may well take out a payment scheme, but this is almost always with a third party, NOT the insurance company. They will get their money up front from the third party company. Therefore its very unlikely thats the reason.

And if you don't keep up with your monthly payments the policy is cancelled, the insurance company will then need to repay a proportion of the money the finance company paid them to bring the balance down to zero. Hence it increases the risk by having people pay monthly.

motorguy

arcon5 wrote: »

And if you don't keep up with your monthly payments the policy is cancelled, the insurance company will then need to repay a proportion of the money the finance company paid them to bring the balance down to zero. Hence it increases the risk by having people pay monthly.

do you really believe insurance companies can weight an insurance quote against you on the basis that you may or may not be more likely to use a monthly payment method and that you then may subsequently miss some payments and then subsequently have to cancel the insurance and then subsequently have to partially refund the finance company?

:rotfl:

Oh come on.

Apart from anything thats discriminating against the people who are unemployed who wont need to use a finance scheme.

I dont even think it would be legal to do that - it would be like Currys charging unemployed people more for a TV because they're more likely to pay it off and then default than those people who are in employment.

It'll be based on statistics of unemployed people of that particular age in that particular area compared to employed people of that particular age in that particular area.

dacouch

pgilc1 wrote: »

do you really believe insurance companies can weight an insurance quote against you on the basis that you may or may not be more likely to use a monthly payment method and that you then may subsequently miss some payments and then subsequently have to cancel the insurance and then subsequently have to partially refund the finance company?

:rotfl:

Oh come on.

Apart from anything thats discriminating against the people who are unemployed who wont need to use a finance scheme.

I dont even think it would be legal to do that - it would be like Currys charging unemployed people more for a TV because they're more likely to pay it off and then default than those people who are in employment.

It'll be based on statistics of unemployed people of that particular age in that particular area compared to employed people of that particular age in that particular area.

Admiral heavily load the premium for non annual payment, probably not due to worrying about having to refund a finance company though

motorguy

dacouch wrote: »

Admiral heavily load the premium for non annual payment, probably not due to worrying about having to refund a finance company though

No they dont.

I've just ran a quote through and they dont even ask you how you want to pay before they give you the price.

What they do do though is to charge you heavily on interest if you pay it monthly, but that is not loading the premium

dacouch

pgilc1 wrote: »

No they dont.

I've just ran a quote through and they dont even ask you how you want to pay before they give you the price.

What they do do though is to charge you heavily on interest if you pay it monthly, but that is not loading the premium

Have you looked at the actual repayments.

I've just run a quote through which gives an annual premium of £572.40 for "cash". The option for instalments is first payments of £66.32 followed by eleven instalments of £66.21 which is a total repayment of £794.63 with an APR of 18.6

As they say in America, you do the math