guys and gals, the same insurance?

ravenhead

Originally posted by Lemming
Why should I have to compete for jobs/pay with women so that you can get equality?

Oh wait .... because it's not right and is sexist :rolleyes:

Oh come on... you & I both know that still goes on...
But all the arguing in the world is not going to change the fact that men are charged more because they are a higher risk... that's it ... it has nothing to do with anything else & rightly so ....

KlodaX

Originally posted by irish1
Well it's more to do with years of driving experience than actual age

so a man who goes for first time insurance at 40 will get the same quote as a man who goes for first time insurance at 20?

I didn't know that.

Lemming

Originally posted by ravenhead
Oh come on... you & I both know that still goes on...

Yes, but we both condemn it - and there is legal comeback to it. However you seem to support the reverse with great glee since it suits you.

Two wrongs, all men are bastards/rapists, etc, etc. ......

But all the arguing in the world is not going to change the fact that men are charged more because they are a higher risk... that's it ... it has nothing to do with anything else & rightly so ....

I've placed the relevant words in itallics. "Risk" does not denote "Actual" reality. So why not charge those who are actually IN accidents as opposed to tarring everyone with the same brush, a la the "All men are bastards/rapists" vein of thinking.

As I've said, the insurance companies in Ireland are pulling quotes/figures out of their arses, and then proceeding to rape the Irish consumer.

ravenhead

Originally posted by KlodaX
so a man who goes for first time insurance at 40 will get the same quote as a man who goes for first time insurance at 20?

I didn't know that.

Well kind of but it may be a little lower

Imposter

Originally posted by ravenhead
But all the arguing in the world is not going to change the fact that men are charged more because they are a higher risk... that's it ...

And similarly all this arguing is not going to change the fact that women will be paying the same as men very soon.... and rightly so.

Try arguing the points raised against you and not repeating what you've already said I dunno how many times.

Villain

Originally posted by KlodaX
so a man who goes for first time insurance at 40 will get the same quote as a man who goes for first time insurance at 20?

I didn't know that.

I didn't say it was purely experience obviously its not, but if you argue the ageism argument thats what you will get told.

Merrion

But why is it that they can legally discrimate based on sex and not on things such as education or race? I don't think anyone here is saying that is doesn't happen it's just an unfair way of judging risk.

They can 'discriminate' on medical grounds even though the people they 'discriminate' against have a full and valid driving license. Try getting insurance if you are diabetic for instance.

They do indirectly discriminate on education - when you fill in your quote request the profession does have a small weighting.

koneko

Originally posted by irish1
Well it's more to do with years of driving experience than actual age

I checked quotes online, filled it in as a male with prov licence (for someone else obviously:) ), no driving experience and no previous insurance. The quote dropped dramatically once the age changed to 25 and over. Driving experience did not increase, the only thing that changed was the age of the driver.

I can see both sides of this arguement. Doesn't mean I'm particularly happy about this as it means my insurance will increase dramatically, while I haven't become any more of a risk and am a good driver.

Villain

Originally posted by koneko
I checked quotes online, filled it in as a male with prov licence (for someone else obviously:) ), no driving experience and no previous insurance. The quote dropped dramatically once the age changed to 25 and over. Driving experience did not increase, the only thing that changed was the age of the driver.

I can see both sides of this arguement. Doesn't mean I'm particularly happy about this as it means my insurance will increase dramatically, while I haven't become any more of a risk and am a good driver.

Ok let me say this as simply as possible, I dont agree that people should suffer because of their age, I was replying to a question of whether or not it is ageism.

I was simply stating that if you accused an insurance company of this they would say it was down to experience, I know they do it by experience also and its wrong but hard to combat that with law.

I think it is something do that the EU should look at

ravenhead

Originally posted by Lemming
Yes, but we both condemn it - and there is legal comeback to it. However you seem to support the reverse with great glee since it suits you.

Two wrongs, all men are bastards/rapists, etc, etc. ......

This is certainly not the case - If it appears like that apoligises .... All I am trying to say is that whatever or whoever the higher risk group is should have higher premiums - be that women or men which ever way it goes... & If it does come in that men are treated more fairly when it comes to insurance then great - that is not my issue & if you read any of my posts you will see that .... All I have answered & yes sometimes repeating myself(maybe I am not being clear enough) is that at the moment because of the higher stats againist man drivers because of the higher rates of accidents their premiums are going to be higher & stay higher while the current method of assessing insurance premiums exists. & to be perfectly honest with you if it were the other way around & it was women that were being charged more I would be saying the exact same thing... by all means if charging more insurance to guys makes them think that second longer before they do something stupid on the road then great - cause it could be you or me that's the next person to meet him on the road.....enough said....

Wrestlemania

Sex should not be an issue, I am for women paying the same because everyone is an induvidual and has a different mind. Yes penalise the wrong doers but not there sex.

Women for to long have been getting away with Bullsh1t and lower prices..The fact remains there are guys out there all to happy to be behind a well and are being tarred with the same brush as a Muppet in a supped up fiesta..

Just because I got a Knob does not mean I just get kicked in it for driving.

And why at 27 should I pay more than a gombeen girl of 19. Eventhough I have been driving for 7 years.

My sister pays 424 a year for her premium and my father 600 why is this when she has been driving for 3 years and my dad 30 years without an accident.

Clear and simple pure bullsh1t so ladies payback is a bitch a so DEAL WITH IT.

Gmodified

what kind of the statement is this.

This is F€€cked up idea.

You shouldn't pay for somebody's careless driving. You should be responsible for you own action and this should be reflected in your premium. I agree that experience is important and should be reflected in insurance premium but 6000euro insurance euro doesn't reflect anything else the rip off.


Young driver is not necessary a boy racer, because his under 25 and the same applies to males and females.



Some people should take the heads out from their exhaust pipes and have look around.

ravenhead

As I said I do agree that the current system isn't fair to everyone but with the way that premiums are judged at the moment (i.e Risk assessment) That is going to happen....

Wrestlemania

Risks should be assess on the induvidual on not there gender...

My dad is the most careful driver in the world yet little madams pay less and have'nt a clue...

30 years experience is longer than some of us are alive...

Now tell me there is no discrimination on sex... it is clear and simple men have less rights than women in a multitude of situtations including driving.

And they say its a mans world. I beg to differ Ladies.

Merrion

It is impossible to asses risk on an individual basis as the sample size is too small.

However if you can prove to your insurer that you are a lesser risk than the average person in your bracket they will probably reduce your premium. You can do this by doing an advanced driving test or agreeing a limited mileage policy.

I appreciate that many men would like to reduce their premium but low insurance premiums are not a "right".

ravenhead

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
Just because I got a Knob does not mean I just get kicked in it for driving.

And why at 27 should I pay more than a gombeen girl of 19. Eventhough I have been driving for 7 years.

My sister pays 424 a year for her premium and my father 600 why is this when she has been driving for 3 years and my dad 30 years without an accident.

Clear and simple pure bullsh1t so ladies payback is a bitch a so DEAL WITH IT.

I'd like to know who your sister is getting her insurance from - I'm 26 driving 4 years - my car is 1.1 & my insurance is 1120.00........
She got some deal.... so it's not just guys....

Wrestlemania

Hibernian I think

rymus

I'm of the opinion that your insurance premium should be based on how well (or otherwise) you drive. Isn't that the whole idea? Instantly punishing people because they are young or have whatever inny or outy bits is nothing short of lunacy.

What you pay to insure yourself should be based on a comprehensive driving skills test and perhaps (in the case of some of the more prone to road rage) a complete psychological evaluation.

This whole culture of insurance companies being able to roll figures off the tops of their heads is madness. "Ahh you're male, 21 years old and driving a 1 litre car.. lets say.... 6000 euro?" No bloody wonder the insurance sector is constantly reporting such high profits, despite the never ending crying of poverty.

Wrestlemania

Originally posted by Merrion
It is impossible to asses risk on an individual basis as the sample size is too small.

However if you can prove to your insurer that you are a lesser risk than the average person in your bracket they will probably reduce your premium. You can do this by doing an advanced driving test or agreeing a limited mileage policy.

I appreciate that many men would like to reduce their premium but low insurance premiums are not a "right".

I have do the real advance drivining test and my insurance on a 1.4 car with 7 years is 1100 my girlfriend who is 20 with a provisonal license and 2 years is 800 with hibernian mmmm..

Well tell women low inusrance is not a right...they will storm dail eireann most likely:p

Lemming

Originally posted by Merrion
However if you can prove to your insurer that you are a lesser risk than the average person in your bracket they will probably reduce your premium. You can do this by doing an advanced driving test or agreeing a limited mileage policy.

One of my friends in particular who is a few years older than me, and has been driving since he was 17 - so about 10 years now - also has advanced driving training. And I don't mean "ignition" or any such crap like that. I'm talking "advanced driving", ie. high-speed handling, hazardous surfaces handling, etc, etc. and also has a no-claims, and still gets the random-number-generator experience.

I appreciate that many men would like to reduce their premium but low insurance premiums are not a "right".

I appreciate that many women want to work in the same jobs that men can do, but jobs are not a "right"

*COUGH COUGH* :rolleyes:

Want cake. Eat cake ........

Wrestlemania

Well Said Lemming! I take a bow..Equal Rights Equal Discrimination.

Simple as that.

seamus

My girlfriend got a fully comp quote on a 1.1 for €1100. 22, 1 year's NCB, prov licence.

My brother got a fully comp quote of €3500 from the same company on a 1.5, 27, 9 year's no claims driving, full licence for 8 years. He went somewhere else and got a much more reasonable quote, but still slightly higher than my gf's.

It's the very fact that this isn't a one-off - everyone is complaining about it - shows that the system is screwed up.

The sooner this comes in, the better.

Merrion

I'm of the opinion that your insurance premium should be based on how well (or otherwise) you drive.

OK - but how can that possibly work as you pay for your insurance in advance.

If it were the case that you provided for an indemnity (say €1M) then when you were finished driving you were returned that indemnity minus the total cost of any claims at the end of the year then you could have totally fair insurance.

Of course this would mean that only people who could set aside an indemnity of that amount could drive. This would discriminate against anybody not paid in brown envelopes.

So instead the insurance company puts aside that indemnity in a reserve (there are all sorts of tedious rules as to where the cash can be held and what the risk/reserves ratio can be) and they then place a bet on you not making a claim. If the odds of you having a claim were zero then the insurance company would not need to charge you at all. However the odds are non zero which means that the insurance company will be paying out on this bet. To cover this they charge you a premium which they think will cover them for the bet.

If there were only one insurance company doing this then they could charge everybody an equal proportion of the group risk. However insurance companies are in competition which means that they want to get as many customers as they can and keep their outlay on the bet as low as they can. This means they need to divide the group risk into subgroups and charge differential premiums on that risk.

Automotive risks divided by three criteria: location, vehicle and driver(s). Each of these could be viewed as 'discriminatory' by those adversely affected by them. However the risk factor tables are one of an insurance company's main competitive advantages and they are never shared between companies. This means that the general pricing is controlled by market forces which is the basic measure of "fairness" in the capitalist system.

ravenhead

Originally posted by seamus
My girlfriend got a fully comp quote on a 1.1 for €1100. 22, 1 year's NCB, prov licence.

My brother got a fully comp quote of €3500 from the same company on a 1.5, 27, 9 year's no claims driving, full licence for 8 years. He went somewhere else and got a much more reasonable quote, but still slightly higher than my gf's.

It's the very fact that this isn't a one-off - everyone is complaining about it - shows that the system is screwed up.

The sooner this comes in, the better.

Another reason your brother's is higher is because your g/f is only driving a 1.1 where as your brother is driving a 1.5 - it only goes without saying that his insurance would be higher .. it's a more powerful car

Gmodified

risk assessment and statistics could be presented in many ways .

looks like lot's of the people are happy to hand out the money once they have somebody to blame and it's becomes justified.

Ask yourself:

If you have successful company and are loosing many for the same period of time as claimed by insurance companies

would you be still in business?

If it were the case that you provided for an indemnity (say €1M) then when you were finished driving you were returned that indemnity minus the total cost of any claims at the end of the year then you could have totally fair insurance.

why not have cheaper insurance from the start and only when you crush your insurance gets pumped up

seamus

Originally posted by Merrion
OK - but how can that possibly work as you pay for your insurance in advance.

It is not up to you to indemnify the insurance company. In theory, your premium should be a percentage of the total cost of claims in your group for last year plus a profit. Not everyone in a group will crash. The insurance company charges a flat rate for your first year, people *must* pay in instalments, and the insurance company reserves the right to increase those instalments if a claim is made. I don't see the problem with that.

If there were only one insurance company doing this then they could charge everybody an equal proportion of the group risk. However insurance companies are in competition which means that they want to get as many customers as they can and keep their outlay on the bet as low as they can. This means they need to divide the group risk into subgroups and charge differential premiums on that risk.

Automotive risks divided by three criteria: location, vehicle and driver(s). Each of these could be viewed as 'discriminatory' by those adversely affected by them. However the risk factor tables are one of an insurance company's main competitive advantages and they are never shared between companies. This means that the general pricing is controlled by market forces which is the basic measure of "fairness" in the capitalist system.

Another problem, is the lack of competition for male premiums. They don't compete, at least in Ireland, instead they run a cartel, where a lot of male drivers will only fit the criteria to be insured by one of the group (and they all have slightly different criteria) who will charge them extortionate amounts.

Merrion

Insurance companies have truely enourmous cash reserves - due to the regulations about reserve to risk ratio. These are invested in government bonds, shorts etc. and this makes money. Your premium is just rental on these reserves...and it does not yield any profit.

Imposter

Originally posted by Merrion
Automotive risks divided by three criteria: location, vehicle and driver(s). Each of these could be viewed as 'discriminatory' by those adversely affected by them. However the risk factor tables are one of an insurance company's main competitive advantages and they are never shared between companies. This means that the general pricing is controlled by market forces which is the basic measure of "fairness" in the capitalist system.

Then why if these companies are so competitive is there such a price difference between Ireland and other countries, countries where these same companies are in business and where they don't penalise males for being males?

Gmodified

Your premium is just rental on these reserves...and it does not yield any profit

it's normal practice that insurance companies are involved in other business activities.
However, looking at the numbers they still manage to turn the profit thanks to high premiums dispute the fact of high claims etc


I agree, in IRL they run nice cartel

PowerHouseDan

i got a quote of 1250 i am just 19 last month,full lis for over a ye and 2 yrs named driver not a bad quote under my own name on a 1.2