Car insurance - Discrimination

Grumpy_chap

Then, just use a comparison site and go somewhere else.  What is so good about that particular insurer?

TooManyPoints

I believe the insurers need to be a little careful. 

They must be able to show that their assessment of risk is made on a reliable basis. They should be able to show that their assessments have demonstrated that drivers holding medically restricted licences pose such an additional risk that they are not prepared to provide cover. They may have trouble doing this – especially with the “blanket” ban they seem to have imposed - because medically restricted licences are issued for such a wide variety of reasons. I believe at the very least they should ask what the medical conditions are that the proposer suffers from so that they can make a proper assessment of the additional risk (if any) he poses. Issuing a blanket ban on people with disabilities covered by the 2010 Act could well see them guilty of discrimination. 

The National Discrimination Association produced a report with recommendations some time ago. This paragraph gives some idea of how they believe insurers should tackle the issue: 

Any insurer may not discriminate against any individual, company or body when quoting for or issuing motor insurance, provided, however, that cover for specific disabilities and diseases may be excluded or provided subject to a higher charge, and benefits with respect to specific disabilities and diseases may be limited in amount, if the party providing insurance cover can establish the permissibility of such an exclusion, higher charge, or limitation pursuant to the requirements at (b) of this section.

(b) For purposes of establishing the permissibility of any exclusion or limitation, the party providing insurance must establish by clear and convincing evidence that the exclusion, higher charge, or limitation: (1) is not based on stereotype or prejudice; (2) is supported by sound and current actuarial data; and (3) is necessary to the realisation of a fair and reasonable rate of return on investment by the party providing insurance.

That said, do you really want to do business with a company that behaves in such a way?

caprikid1

Whats the difference between we don't want to insure you and here's a quote £1000 a month ?

Same reply same outcome.

Insurance is Ageist, Sexist, Disabilityist, racist (Postcodes).

I'm registered blind and my car insurance quotes are shocking ....

TooManyPoints

Whats the difference between we don't want to insure you and here's a quote £1000 a month ?

None. The insurer would still have to show that by asking for £1,000 a month they are not unfairly discriminating.

Sandtree

caprikid1 said:

Insurance is Ageist, Sexist, Disabilityist, racist (Postcodes).

I'm registered blind and my car insurance quotes are shocking ....

Not sexist in general insurance... they were prohibited from using gender for rating factors a long time ago.

There is a difference between differentiation and illegal discrimination... even for protected characteristics (exc sex) it is not illegal discrimination to price based on age because you have the data to back up the fact that on average people in certain age groups have different claims exposures when all other factors are equal.

To the OP's point... I would be very surprised if this was an "insurer" but more likely a broker or other form of intermediary. The fact that the DVLA has decided to restrict the license I would argue is a strong indication that there is sufficient evidence that on average there is a potential negative impact on driving. The DVLA take way more details on the individual case than any mass market insurer ever would and the fact they've risk assessed a negative impact probably is sufficient to say its negative for the insurer too.

Should the broker be saying they won't quote rather than trying to and returning quotes of £10,000? In the grand scheme does it make any difference? Use an aggregator like everyone else and you;ll get a ton of quotes from those that are comfortable with the extra risk.

DB1904

caprikid1 said:

Whats the difference between we don't want to insure you and here's a quote £1000 a month ?

Same reply same outcome.

Insurance is Ageist, Sexist, Disabilityist, racist (Postcodes).

I'm registered blind and my car insurance quotes are shocking ....

How is it racist? In 35 years of driving I've never been ask to supply my ethnicity.

Grey_Critic

When I ran a car/van/truck hire operation in the 1980s I had a list of restricted **Hirers** that the insurers would not cover. Professional footballers were one - My youngest son had similar problems due to his occupation in the USA (film director) when he came to the UK and wanted to hire a vehicle.

Many professional people have their own insurance that can be used on such occasions. From an insurers viewpoint it is the financial risk

maxmycardagain

Bankruptcy can add 20% to your premiums as it shows you are not trustworthy or honest

Freecall

maxmycardagain said:

Bankruptcy can add 20% to your premiums as it shows you are not trustworthy or honest

That's a bit harsh.  Just because somebody has made poor financial decisions doesn't necessarily mean that they are dishonest.

TimSynths

I too have a medically restricted license, never had a problem getting quotes at renewal time through comparison sites. Always have a few at the bottom of the page saying they couldn't quote but after looking at the top for £162 a year prices I rarely get to the bottom and past the silly quotes anyway.