EU to ban gender discrimination on car insurance.

rubadub

The EU is to ban gender discrimination on car insurance. I wonder if people will now call for an end to age discrimination too. In the short term this will appear to be good news for men and bad for women. But it is actually good news for women in the long run. I saw an interview with one of the top guys in the AA a year or so ago who said women’s insurance costs were due to surpass men’s in the next 5 years. He said women claim more money per mile travelled but drive far less than men, but women are starting to drive more miles per year and so are expected to claim more soon. Many people get upset about insurance as though the cost indicates driving ability, many people think women’s insurance is cheaper because they are “better” drivers. I could crash 10 times a week and have had my licence revoked before and have lots of penalty points and still have low insurance IF I make no claims. If a fit 30 year old trained sea diver and a 70 year old man with asthma went into an insurance company to be insured against drowning while doing a once off swimming of the channel the old man would be charged more. But if both wanted insurance against drowning for the year the old mans would probably be far cheaper even though the diver is a “better” swimmer. Are they allowed to racially discriminate on insurance too? If there were ads on TV for cheaper insurance for “caucasian gentlemen”, I am sure this ban on discrimination would have been called for long ago. But since women were getting it cheaper there wasn’t as much fuss, “sure they were discriminated against for years so 2 wrongs make a right”

Éomer of Rohan

You see I like the way they do this.

The sex disrimination is about to be outlawed by the EU; what is to say this will bring men's insurance dpwn rather than women's insurance up? It's not as though all insurance companies aren't in on the same scame together!

Belfast

Gender and age discrimination
Should insurance not be based on how some one drives not the age gender or racial group they belong to. It is possible to test some driving ability in a computer simulator. It is also possible to install a data logger in a car that can show how many miles you drive and at what speed. This information could be used to decide what your risk is for insurance purposes. Most accident in are predictable in that if you look at a person driving style and this can be seen by check the data logger when the car tax is renewed.

El_MUERkO

Men crash more, woment cost more when they crash, its all just another way for insurance firms to cook the books.

Imposter

What exactly would this data logger do?

Would it accurately record that you were doing 50mph in a 40mph zone or would it just record you were doing 50mph? Would it measure road conditions, weather, amount of cyclists or pedestrians about, would it understand traffic lights etc.?

A simulator might give a bit of an idea but it could be treated like a driving test and the driver could be on their best behaviour which is often not their driving style. For me it would make more sense to have realistic non-discriminatory insurance (not based on sex, age etc..). Something along these lines are implemented here where every 2 years you move down a level. After 12 years you're on level zero and insurance is low. Have a crash and you move up one or more levels depending on its seriousness.
And then there's the ludacrous concept of a provisional licence and the rules concerning them!

Villain

Oh Women won't be happy because I can't see the companies bringing down male insurance so female insurance will probably just go up.

Age discrimination banned would be a lot better for us young drivers. I'm 22 with a full licence for over 3 and a half years but I pay 2000 on 1.4 after doing the Ignition course!!!!

ixoy

Isn't the law going to affect other areas too? It's not just limited to car insurance - that's just one of the most affected areas. For example, would it not affect clubs where there are promotions having "women get in free"? That's gender-based discrimination. Ditto any adjusted policies for life assurance that are based on women living longer.

rubadub

Originally posted by Imposter
What exactly would this data logger do?

Would it accurately record that you were doing 50mph in a 40mph zone or would it just record you were doing 50mph?!

i think there was acutally talk of it doing just that, using GPS.
as you say the simulator or test is a misnomer since you will drive good in the test.
they will never come up with a good way of determining insurance but they cant get much worse than what they have now!

star gazer

Age descrimination, sex descrimination, career descrimination, lifestyle descrimination and you thought we lived in an equality based democracy. Maybe instead of the PC we're all equal bit we should celebrate our differences? It's probably too difficult for the lawyers to think up laws to stop people over-celebrating those differences.
Don't hold your breath for the EU to do anything about it, negotiations are ongoing to bring in the law within the next ten years.

Bard

How will that affect companies like... this who offer car insurance exclusively for women?

Villain

Originally posted by Bard
How will that affect companies like... this who offer car insurance exclusively for women?

If they refuse to quote you as a male you can probably sue them.

(I think probably wrong do)

seamus

Originally posted by El_MUERkO
Men crash more, woment cost more when they crash, its all just another way for insurance firms to cook the books.

Wrong way round

Women are involved in more collisions, and tend to hit stationary objects. Men however, crash spectacularly, and cause more damage, ie incur more cost per accident. It'll probably level out within a few years when the amount of women drivers is on a par with men.

Elmo

Does anyone know the percentage of driver who are women?
Does anyone know the percentage of women drivers that are in accidents?
Does anyone know the average amount of miles the average woman clocks up?

gurramok

From a personal perspective:

Mam (64 yr old female) gets quote of €705 TPF on 1st prov with no NCB for 1.4 L car, ie...never drove before in her life.

Me(28yr old male) gets quote of €1100 TPF(€1300 comp) on full licence(1yr) with 2yrs NCB for 1.1L car.

From same insurance company...its a combination of age and gender discrimination.
Can the extra money I have to pay be explained otherwise ?

If anyone dont believe these quotes, try putting them online for yourself, you will always get cheaper for her despite the fact she has never driven before yet she is considered a lesser risk.

Victor

Gummamok, at 64 is your mother suddenly going to be doing massive mileage?

Originally posted by ixoy
For example, would it not affect clubs where there are promotions having "women get in free"?

And had been out-lawed for years.

oscarBravo

Is insurance discriminatory in a useful sense of the word?

An insurance premium is based on an actuarial assessment of the risk posed by a category of driver. If 60-something females on their first provisional statistically cost less in claims than 20-somethings with full licences, they are going to pay less for their insurance.

Is this truly discriminatory?

For the record: I'm not convinced that the insurance industry is a model of openness and honesty; I'm questioning whether it's actually discriminatory.

SCULLY

Originally posted by oscarBravo
Is insurance discriminatory in a useful sense of the word?

An insurance premium is based on an actuarial assessment of the risk posed by a category of driver. If 60-something females on their first provisional statistically cost less in claims than 20-somethings with full licences, they are going to pay less for their insurance.

Is this truly discriminatory?

For the record: I'm not convinced that the insurance industry is a model of openness and honesty; I'm questioning whether it's actually discriminatory.

Got to agree with you there - Unfortunatly ,statistically, a 20 year old bloke is a greater risk than a 20 year old woman thus the insurance companies will charge them more. Also, a lot blokes seem to tend to go for the bigger cc cars as opposed to the 1ltr micras etc. Insurance is a rip off over here, but always has been (my first insurance ,10 years ago, was approx £1200). Also, the general standard of driving on the irish roads is cack, which does nothing to help any of the insurance prices.

star gazer

To quote a cliché 'lies damned lies and statistics'
Apparently insurance companies have been making losses in the irish market for years and yet there don't seem to be very many high profile closures, only semi states seem to be able to survive years of losses like that with government funding. It doesn't add up.
The problem everyone has with descrimination based on a single attribute like race age or sex is that a range of preconceptions can build up to the detriment of that persuasion. We are supposed to have the right to be treated innocently until proven guilty no matter where we come from and our age/sex etc. but when it comes to insurance you are judged as a stereo-type before you enter the room for a quote. If you are a young male you are already guilty. Statistically in America Blacks occupy a greater proportion of jails than whites, does that mean that juries should pre-judge black people because of their colour?

oscarBravo

Originally posted by star gazer
To quote a cliché 'lies damned lies and statistics'
Apparently insurance companies have been making losses in the irish market for years and yet there don't seem to be very many high profile closures, only semi states seem to be able to survive years of losses like that with government funding. It doesn't add up.

I don't disagree; my question is whether basing an insurance premium on demographic information is actually discriminatory.

The problem everyone has with descrimination based on a single attribute like race age or sex is that a range of preconceptions can build up to the detriment of that persuasion. We are supposed to have the right to be treated innocently until proven guilty no matter where we come from and our age/sex etc. but when it comes to insurance you are judged as a stereo-type before you enter the room for a quote. If you are a young male you are already guilty. Statistically in America Blacks occupy a greater proportion of jails than whites, does that mean that juries should pre-judge black people because of their colour?

You're missing the point: we're not talking about judgement, we're talking about the likelihood of having to pay out on an individual risk.

The only way to avoid demographic grouping is to do as you imply: judge every individual on merit. This suggests that everyone is innocent until proven guilty. In this case, everyone would have essentially free insurance the first time, because they have never made a claim.

Then the person claims. What do you do then? Hike up the premium to cover the cost of the claim? What if they can't afford it, and don't take out insurance again? Who picks up the tab?

It's not going to work, so instead the risk gets distributed. Rather than distribute all the risk evenly, it gets distributed over people with similar demographics, based on the statistical likelihood of that demographic to make a claim.

Interestingly, VHI and Bupa are required to distribute the loading over all insurees equally. This means that healthy young people tend to carry the cost of more frail older people.

Typedef

EU to ban gender discrimination on car insurance.

Oh, well. That just means women will end up paying as much as men.

Welcome to capitalism.

star gazer

originally posted by oscarbravo
The only way to avoid demographic grouping is to do as you imply: judge every individual on merit. This suggests that everyone is innocent until proven guilty. In this case, everyone would have essentially free insurance the first time, because they have never made a claim.

There is no one out there that would claim to be a perfect driver that could go through life without making a driving mistake. It's common sense that there would be some bottom figure to offset risk.

Putting a car on the street is a risk. Giving drivers a quote based on a base figure of having a car and never driving it plus, loadings for drviers ability in test circumstances, no. of years driving, record of claims, mileage and vehicle would give people a quote, not on the basis of demographics.

There probably is good business sense to demographic loading but is it compatible with equality law?

rubadub

Originally posted by oscarBravo
Is insurance discriminatory in a useful sense of the word?

An insurance premium is based on an actuarial assessment of the risk posed by a category of driver. If 60-something females on their first provisional statistically cost less in claims than 20-somethings with full licences, they are going to pay less for their insurance.

Is this truly discriminatory?

For the record: I'm not convinced that the insurance industry is a model of openness and honesty; I'm questioning whether it's actually discriminatory.

i think they should be allowed to "discriminate" on whatever grounds they want, as it is apparently more fair to the customer (if they did it properly). i just wonder about their policy of openly advertising the fact that they do, and how there seem to be few complaints about the sexist adverts. "lower insurance for women" translates to me as "penalty for being male". why dont more advertise who gets cheaper insurance and why? should they have to disclose all their catergories? this would lead to people lying and it is difficult to lie about your sex. and ad saying "cheaper on the southside of dublin" would cause a stir, as would "lower insurance for men" or "penalty charge for women" which was predicted to happen. they discriminate on many grounds already, i questioned if people would demand an end to ageism too, but they also discriminate on profession, location and other factors. i would prefer to be asked for lots of info and made take tests to prove i am a safe driver who wont make many claims. just as a healthy person would like to avoid taking life insurance with a company who do not require a medical, they are forking out for people on deaths door who only go there since there is no need for a medical. i would want to be examined, seen to be healthy and charged accordingly.

other countries charge insurance via petrol costs which is a good idea in some ways. it takes into account how big your car is and how many miles you drive. doesnt take into account anything else though

a strange one i recently discovered is if a male has a female as a named driver on their insurance it actually goes down, yes cheaper in all cases i have heard, yes the female is the named driver it is totally above board. one 28y male i know got his reduced to 1800 from 2200 on a 1.4l by putting a 28y female as a named driver. she doesnt have a irish licence and lives in london so faxed over a copy of her licence and that is all they needed, they know she has never even seen the car and didnt have to sign a thing. another guy in early 30's got 450 reduced by putting a 30y female on his. she then tried the same putting him on and hers was increased 100. i can only presume that males with females named have less claims per year, possibly because tehy are more likely to be in a relationship and may have kids and so may tend to drive slower and have less claims. any males out there try it and if you save a lot send me a donation to this address.... ;-)

sovtek

Ach! It's the wrong issue anyway. It's not going to bring insurance down.
You effectively have three insurance companies in the whole of Ireland. The government must allow other insurers to come in and create competition.
All this garbage about "comp culture" and "the lads" is just a distraction.
We also have the same problem with "comp culture" and have a high incidence of driving deaths in Texas... but we have competition.
I've never paid more for my insurance than my car was worth.
I actually tried to buy a car a year or so ago and every quote I got was well over what the car was worth per year.
I'm 32 and I've been driving since I was 16.

bonkey

Originally posted by star gazer
Apparently insurance companies have been making losses in the irish market for years and yet there don't seem to be very many high profile closures, only semi states seem to be able to survive years of losses like that with government funding. It doesn't add up.

The reason tehre haven't been closures, I thought, is because there has been merger after merger, both intra- and inter- nationally?

Personally, I think the EU may be wrong to take this action, but I can understand why they are taking it.

Gender-discrimination is seen as a universally bad thing....so the insurance companies obviously shouldn't be allowed base their figures on it. However, the simple truth is that [/i]men and women are different in some ways[/i].

If someone can show a genuine statistical difference in the likelihood of an event occurring, based solely on gender, then that is no more discrimination than men not being allowed to give birth is.

However, as with all of these things, the unfortunate truth is that if its permitted in one sector - even for valid reasons - sooner or later you'll have every single gender-discrimination law-suit ending up with the same type of crap we're hearing from the Vintners these days : "But they can do it........so we have to be allowed do it too......."


jc

star gazer

origianlly posted by bonkey
The reason tehre haven't been closures, I thought, is because there has been merger after merger, both intra- and inter- nationally?

Fair point. But doesn't the logic still continue, a loss-maker taking over another loss maker, it seems to have taken huge increases in irish insurance costs before profits kicked in. ok maybe the last few were hoping to last out to become part of a market with a small number of dominant suppliers who could make a lot of profits.

Victor

Originally posted by oscarBravo
Interestingly, VHI and Bupa are required to distribute the loading over all insurees equally. This means that healthy young people tend to carry the cost of more frail older people.

Bupa assess people individually and give lower premiums to "healthy" / low risk people.

Originally posted by star gazer
There probably is good business sense to demographic loading but is it compatible with equality law?

The Equality Act allows discrimination when based on sound actuarial evidence.

oscarBravo

Originally posted by Victor
Bupa assess people individually and give lower premiums to "healthy" / low risk people.

I thought when they set up here it was on condition that they worked on the same basis as VHI, with "community loading" or whatever it's called? Am I wrong? Has it changed?

Victor

Originally posted by oscarBravo
I thought when they set up here it was on condition that they worked on the same basis as VHI, with "community loading" or whatever it's called? Am I wrong? Has it changed?

Apologies, Bupa don't community rate as such, but do have to pay a subsidy to those that do (i.e. VHI).

dogs

Originally posted by Victor
... The Equality Act allows discrimination when based on sound actuarial evidence.

That's true, but it doesn't mean you can't successfully challenge that data...
http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/topstories/1608914?view=Eircomnet

I'm a "young male driver" and ringing around for insurance quotes gets me the following range of ages I need to be over to be covered: 22, 24, 25, 26 and, most worryingly, 30.

This all before they even ask how long I've held my full clean licence for, what my NCB is -- it's purely my age and gender.

Originally posted by bonkey
If someone can show a genuine statistical difference in the likelihood of an event occurring, based solely on gender, then that is no more discrimination than men not being allowed to give birth is.

I understand where you're coming from here, but to take your point in another direction, if you can show a genuine statistical difference in the likelihood of an event ocurring based soley on race, would that be discrimination ? "Sorry, we don't quote Asians" ?

I have as much control over my age as my race. Discriminate against people who have penalty points/who smoke/who have bad hair -- but not on properites you can never change.

Any new anti-discriminatory laws in this area are badly needed. But I suspect it will be too little, far too late.

Imposter

Originally posted by Victor
The Equality Act allows discrimination when based on sound actuarial evidence.

The problem with any group who hads to provide evidence is that they'll always skew it in their favour. Even 'independent' evidence when funded by a concerned party is often skewed as they will omit something that is very relevant. For example would this actual eveidence contain information on the amount of crashed the police were called to and how many claims were made? Quite often people don't make claims because of the penalties they will receive in future. What is the profile of these drivers?

Originally posted by Bonkey
...then that is no more discrimination than men not being allowed to give birth is.

But as everyone knows (thanks to Monty Phyton) men have the right to give birth, no matter how unlikely it might be to happen.