Motor Insurance for Women

d-redser

I am due to renew my insurance and the best quote I have gotten is from a new group. Its a website www.its4women.ie

They are offering a good package too. I am a bit dubious about this but it all looks good and they are connected with HSBC..

Has anybody had any dealings with them or any advice?

blastman

Can you imagine the furore if there was a men-only insurance company?

d-redser

Yea, I would well believe it.

But as "they" say, women are safer drivers blah blah blah!!

They seem to be a lot cheaper on their quotes though...

blastman

They also ask you where your car sleeps at night! :rolleyes:

d-redser

blastman wrote:

They also ask you where your car sleeps at night! :rolleyes:

So now that you have looked at their site, what is your opinion on them, besides the fact that they are gender biased?

Gran Hermano

d-redser wrote:

But as "they" say, women are safer drivers blah blah blah!!

The only justification I ever heard was not that women are safer
drivers but rather whilst they have more accidents they cost less
for insurance companies to settle. They tend to be of the
'bumping one micra into another in a shopping centre car park'
resulting in lower settlements than a typical male claim which
is often of the high-speed/high impact accident resulting in a
larger payout.

I also believe that the average woman tends to drive less miles
on an annual basis compared to the average male driver.

d-redser

Gran Hermano wrote:

The only justification I ever heard was not that women are safer
drivers but rather whilst they have more accidents they cost less
for insurance companies to settle. They tend to be of the
'bumping one micra into another in a shopping centre car park'
resulting in lower settlements than a typical male claim which
is often of the high-speed/high impact accident resulting in a
larger payout.

I also believe that the average woman tends to drive less miles
on an annual basis compared to the average male driver.

Do you think that this company is legit, if in an accident would pay out, are trustworthy etc?

Keith C

Theres no step back bonus provided as standard & you have to pay for bonus protection & you dont have driving of other cars extension.
Its looks ok though.

d-redser

What is a step back bonus?

Mitch Connor

d-redser wrote:

What is a step back bonus?

i think it means if you have, say, a 50% NCB and make a claim, you would only lose 10% of your NCB, as opposed to it being put back to zero.

Linford

d-redser wrote:

Do you think that this company is legit, if in an accident would pay out, are trustworthy etc?

The company is regulated by the FSA (UK Financial Services Authority) and not by the Financial Regulator. The have a passport (regulatory term) to trade in Ireland (similar to the way Rabo Direct are in Ireland).

Have a look at the FSA website http://www.fsa.gov.uk/register/firmBasicDetails.do?sid=129819

smash

I'm starting to get really fed up with these type of companies, surely it's sexual discrimination...

My other half is on her first provisional and has had it less than a year. Her insurance is a third of mine and it costs me nothing extra to put her on my insurance policy for a 3ltr, imagine if it was the other way around!

Keith C

d-redser wrote:

What is a step back bonus?

if you have a claim your bonus goes from 50% to 20% instead of 50% to 0%. You get to "save" a small bit of your bonus.

unkel

steve06 wrote:

surely it's sexual discrimination...

No, it's purely based on actuarial data. As Gran Hermano said, a woman driver can be expected to cause more accidents than a man of the same age, etc. but the expected claim total for the woman is lower than for the man. Hence the insurance premium is less. Simple!

I've never heard about drunk girls playing chicken down the country somewhere at 3 o'clock in the morning, have you? There'd be very few horrific accidents like the one in the current tv ad caused by women compared to men

mathie

unkel wrote:

No, it's purely based on actuarial data. As Gran Hermano said, a woman driver can be expected to cause more accidents than a man of the same age, etc. but the expected claim total for the woman is lower than for the man. Hence the insurance premium is less. Simple!

I've never heard about drunk girls playing chicken down the country somewhere at 3 o'clock in the morning, have you? There'd be very few horrific accidents like the one in the current tv ad caused by women compared to men

I can give you testimonies from foremen (who could no doubt produce statistics if needed) claiming that Polish men are better workers than Irish men.

Now could we pay more to Polish men on that grounds?

I think not.

Its descrimination. Plain and simple.
And it goes against the European Constitution.

http://www.europeanconstitution.ie/constitution/en/partii_en.asp

"Article II-81
Non-discrimination
1. Any discrimination based on any ground such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation shall be prohibited."

d-redser

Thanks for the explanation. I really have to look out for all the fine print.

And I do agree that it is incredibly biased but if it was the other way around and men were getting cheaper insurance you would certainly avail of it then.

I also understand your frustration when it comes to paying for insurance. I have been driving for over 5 years. My insurance when I first started was £3200 irish punts, way more than the value of the car.

England has had these "women only insurers" for years but I don't think there has been any major hassle from the men but I also doubt that their premiums would be as high as ours...

Robbo

mathie wrote:

And it goes against the European Constitution.

Perhaps, but the Euro Constitution has about as much chance of being ratified as I have of bedding Scarlet Johansson.

Hotblack Desiato

unkel wrote:

No, it's purely based on actuarial data.

And if you ever ask to see the data to justify it (or, say, age loading which applies to females as well) you'll be told "f..k off, it's confidential commercial information." It's Kafka-esque really as the insurers are obliged to have data to justify the differences in premium but are not obliged to disclose it to anyone.

It's funny how sexism and ageism are the last two acceptable forms of discrimination left (and sometimes they work in favour of men, sometimes against, sometimes in favour of the young, sometimes against.)
If you had rock-solid data, corrected for all other factors, proving Race A drove more dangerously than Race B, do you think for one micro-second you'd be let away with racial loading?
Yet sex and age loading is acceptable. You can't change your age or sex any more than you can your race, and tarring all members of those age or gender groups is as wrong as tarring all members of a race is.

smash

unkel wrote:

I've never heard about drunk girls playing chicken down the country somewhere at 3 o'clock in the morning, have you? There'd be very few horrific accidents like the one in the current tv ad caused by women compared to men

well could you imagine the outrage from feminist groups around the country if there was an ad on TV where a woman actually caused an accident...

Like stated previously, women have just as many accidents! but shhh, you can't say it out loud incase there's a riot.

layke

I believe Eaglestar do a specific insurance for wimmin folk. My mothers with them and she finds them good. They department is called Ladystar suprisingly
.

blastman

d-redser wrote:

So now that you have looked at their site, what is your opinion on them, besides the fact that they are gender biased?

I don't have an opinion as they wouldn't quote me for my car when I went through the quote process using the female version of my first name!

Obviously my car is very manly!!

Robbo

steve06 wrote:

well could you imagine the outrage from feminist groups around the country if there was an ad on TV where a woman actually caused an accident...

It wouldn't exactly fit in with the current Jerry Bruckheimer style of road safety ads if you had a 20 year old blonde in a silver 206 with L plates, texting on a pink clamshell Motorola with Snow Patrol oozing out of the stereo as she rear ends the car ahead?

How do you crowbar a tagline into that?

"Young women: Pay some attention to matters outside of your own solpsistic cocoon"?

unkel

ninja900 wrote:

the insurers are obliged to have data to justify the differences in premium

Indeed it would be better if the government would publish the claims data as a total from all insurers, split out in the relevant categories, like age, gender, claim size, etc.

ninja900 wrote:

If you had rock-solid data, corrected for all other factors, proving Race A drove more dangerously than Race B, do you think for one micro-second you'd be let away with racial loading?

The problem is that race is not clearly defined where age and gender are. If it was, there could well be racial loading too if actuarial data backed it up

steve06 wrote:

Like stated previously, women have just as many accidents!

As stated before, women actually cause more accidents than men

upsfan

Christ, women-only insurers, now I've heard everything. That is serious discrimination. What's next? Ageist insurers refusing to take on 17-25 year olds?

d-redser

Bitter men

Aquos76

I managed to get Fully comp with Full No claims protection on a 01 megane 1.4 for €225 with Hibernian(done through a local broker) for my wife. 32 year old full Licence and full no claims bonus and no Penalty Points. 1 named driver on policy also.

We got some sort of discount for getting me named on it. Something to do with a second car which has a bigger engine size.

upsfan

ninja900 wrote:

And if you ever ask to see the data to justify it (or, say, age loading which applies to females as well) you'll be told "f..k off, it's confidential commercial information." It's Kafka-esque really as the insurers are obliged to have data to justify the differences in premium but are not obliged to disclose it to anyone.

Yeah, it's a conspiracy on the part of the insurance companies who aren't just out to make a profit but are actually run by militant feminists.

Sure look at road accident figures which show a completely flat distribution across age and sex with absolutely no peak around young males.

d-redser

upsfan wrote:

Christ, women-only insurers, now I've heard everything. That is serious discrimination. What's next? Ageist insurers refusing to take on 17-25 year olds?

That's already happening, Hibernan!!

upsfan

d-redser wrote:

That's already happening, Hibernan!!

No! Say it isn't true! They'll be increasing premiums for people who have accidents next!

d-redser

upsfan wrote:

No! Say it isn't true! They'll be increasing premiums for people who have accidents next!

I am sorry to say that it is going ahead too

Hotblack Desiato

upsfan wrote:

Yeah, it's a conspiracy on the part of the insurance companies who aren't just out to make a profit but are actually run by militant feminists.

Sure look at road accident figures which show a completely flat distribution across age and sex with absolutely no peak around young males.

You've missed the point completely.

Nobody is denying that young males have more car accidents. The question is, do the stats justify the loadings that are charged? Nobody knows and the insurers certainly aren't telling.

But there's a more fundamental question - is it fair and just that someone be judged by the behaviour of their peers rather than their own behaviour?

If my name was Steve and the insurance company could prove that people called Steve had more accidents, but I was a safer than average driver, would they be justified in loading me? Under the law as it stands, yes.

quarryman

ninja900 wrote:

Nobody is denying that young males have more car accidents.

hang on, someone else said above that women have more accidents they just cost less in damages.

which is it?

Orange69

Lets not forget ladies night, ladies hour, women only gyms etc..

Its Complete hypocrisy..

Id like to open up a "whites only" gym just to highlight the issue..

Its equivalent!!

upsfan

ninja900 wrote:

Nobody is denying that young males have more car accidents. The question is, do the stats justify the loadings that are charged? Nobody knows and the insurers certainly aren't telling.

But there's a more fundamental question - is it fair and just that someone be judged by the behaviour of their peers rather than their own behaviour?

Er... "fair?" Insurance companies are private concerns, not a state service. If young male premiums were in fact excessively loaded, that would suggest that there would be a market opening for a company to _specialise_ in offering cheaper insurance to young males. In fact, as d-redser points out, the _exact opposite_ is happening, some companies are simply refusing to insure young males at all. Why do you think they are doing this?

smash

Orange69 wrote:

Lets not forget ladies night, ladies hour, women only gyms etc..

Its Complete hypocrisy..

Id like to open up a "whites only" gym just to highlight the issue..

Its equivalent!!

ye, try open a white peoples insurance company... see how fast you'd be shut down!

Hotblack Desiato

upsfan wrote:

Er... "fair?" Insurance companies are private concerns, not a state service.

But unlike any other private concern, you are legally forced to buy their product if you want to drive. This is why just leaving it all up to 'competition' (such as it exists in Ireland) is not good enough.

If young male premiums were in fact excessively loaded, that would suggest that there would be a market opening for a company to _specialise_ in offering cheaper insurance to young males.

Isn't that what Quinn are doing?

In fact, as d-redser points out, the _exact opposite_ is happening, some companies are simply refusing to insure young males at all. Why do you think they are doing this?

So what - there isn't a motor insurance company in Ireland who will quote anyone on any type of vehicle.

BlackWizard

Lots of these old threads popping up lately. What's with that?

The conspiracy side of me thinks it's people with vested interested in the companies they are suggesting :eek:

Saab Ed

They're everywhere:eek: