Motorcyclist wins Equality case???

HelterSkelter

I heard Gerry Ryan read out an article from one of the newspapers this morning about a young motorcyclist who took a case against Carol Nash Insurance for refusing to quote him. Either he won the case or it was settled out of court, I'm not quite sure. In any case they agreeded to pay his insurance of €6000 (!!!) for one year to compensate him for the age discrimination.

Did anyone else see/hear about this story? What newspaper was it in?

Thanks.

Banjo013

Nah didn't see the story ...

If I'm not mistaken (again this could be a total load of bol**x) the insurance companies are legally obliged to provide a quote. Obviously in this case Carol Nash just didn't want to take on the risk of this motorcyclist.

However the "proper" way (if there is one) of dealing with this is for the insurance company to quote something stupid like €10k. That way they've met their legal obligation while ensuring the customer won't be in the slightest bit interested.

LFCFan

surely this opens the door for more cases like it?

declanoneill

IIRC this is not the first time this has happened in Ireland, I recall something like this (thought I think it was car insurance) a few years back and the same thing happened (by "same thing" I mean the insurance company lost). As stated above the simple way around this is for the company to quote loony prices so it's all much of a muchness really

Eoin

Banjo013 wrote:

Obviously in this case Carol Nash just didn't want to take on the risk of this motorcyclist.

Why is there more risk to the insurance company for a motorcyclist rather than a car driver (3rd Party) - surely a motorcycle will do no more damage to a 3rd party in an accident than a car driver?

seamus

eoin_s wrote:

Why is there more risk to the insurance company for a motorcyclist rather than a car driver (3rd Party) - surely a motorcycle will do no more damage to a 3rd party in an accident than a car driver?

As usual, muppets have ruined it for the rest of us.

The cost of third party motorcycle insurance shot up after the law in 1999 changed so the third party insurance had to extend to passengers injured in accidents. By far, the biggest payouts are made to passengers of inexperienced riders (morons who buy a bike then spend the day ferrying all their mates up and down the "dualler" at 50mph).

Like car accidents, uninsured riders (the usual suspects on mopeds we see without helmets, breaking lights, and generally being scumbags) are included in the stats for "Crashes with passenger", causing our insurance to go up.

Before this, a rider simply had an obligation to inform his/her passenger that they weren't insured. Much better IMO.

gline

seamus wrote:

As usual, muppets have ruined it for the rest of us.

The cost of third party motorcycle insurance shot up after the law in 1999 changed so the third party insurance had to extend to passengers injured in accidents. By far, the biggest payouts are made to passengers of inexperienced riders (morons who buy a bike then spend the day ferrying all their mates up and down the "dualler" at 50mph).

Like car accidents, uninsured riders (the usual suspects on mopeds we see without helmets, breaking lights, and generally being scumbags) are included in the stats for "Crashes with passenger", causing our insurance to go up.

Before this, a rider simply had an obligation to inform his/her passenger that they weren't insured. Much better IMO.

I agree, it only takes a few to ruin it for a lot of us. Its those scumbags that give bikers a bad name and everyone things they are dangerous lunatics. Not fair, but then again life aint fair.

HelterSkelter

Banjo013 wrote:

Nah didn't see the story ...

If I'm not mistaken (again this could be a total load of bol**x) the insurance companies are legally obliged to provide a quote. Obviously in this case Carol Nash just didn't want to take on the risk of this motorcyclist.

However the "proper" way (if there is one) of dealing with this is for the insurance company to quote something stupid like €10k. That way they've met their legal obligation while ensuring the customer won't be in the slightest bit interested.

They can only quote 10K if they can back up with statistical data that the customers risk profile justifies such a huge quote.

madrab

read the article today and imo i wouldnt have insured him, only 2&1/2 years no claims to drive a gsxr1000...not a chance boyo get more experience


rant over

(but on the plus side well done for getting one over on the insurance companies)

gline

madrab wrote:

read the article today and imo i wouldnt have insured him, only 2&1/2 years no claims to drive a gsxr1000...not a chance boyo get more experience


rant over

(but on the plus side well done for getting one over on the insurance companies)

yeh im not sure wehther i would have insured him if i were them, a gsxr1000 is a death machine, hehehehe

HelterSkelter

madrab wrote:

read the article today and imo i wouldnt have insured him, only 2&1/2 years no claims to drive a gsxr1000...not a chance boyo get more experience

What paper was it in?

Seth Brundle

He was told by Carole Nash that they couldn't offer cover because he was too young, not because he was 2 1/2 years driving or that it was too large a bike.
In doing this they were ageist and in the wrong!

echomadman

read the article today and imo i wouldnt have insured him, only 2&1/2 years no claims to drive a gsxr1000...not a chance boyo get more experience

OK i havent read the article, anyone got an online version? ...
but how long exactly do you think he should be driving before you'ld allow him to have a gixxer?
the irish motorcycle licensing laws say 2 years on <33bhp after passing your test before you can move up to bigger bikes. I know i'll be on a 1000cc+ bike as soon as i'm legally allowed to, i'd hate to think guys with the same opinion as you might be making the decision on wether i'll be allowed to or not.

madrab

im just of the opinion that people should work their way up experience, ie start off small and work your way up (power wise not cc wise)

i dont think a bike with that kind of power should be for someone with a good few years experience driving powerful bikes (around 5 yrs at least)

and before you say it im a young guy,22, with 4 years exp and i wouldnt get a bike that powerful(yet)
but thats my opinion

oh and it was in the star

HelterSkelter

madrab wrote:

oh and it was in the star

Thanks!

Boggle

Its not a landmark case by any means as there was a case a while back where an "old" man was refused a quote and won his case.

They are entitled to base their quote on statistical data but do have to quote. (Wonder what would happen if a bloke tried to get a lady only motor policy?? - again they could charge based on stats - but being lady only they could not have those stats and to refuse a quote based on sex is sexist...)

HelterSkelter

Boggle wrote:

Its not a landmark case by any means as there was a case a while back where an "old" man was refused a quote and won his case.

They are entitled to base their quote on statistical data but do have to quote. (Wonder what would happen if a bloke tried to get a lady only motor policy?? - again they could charge based on stats - but being lady only they could not have those stats and to refuse a quote based on sex is sexist...)

I have a very similar case against a large Insurance company coming up later this year, mmmmm €€€€€€€€, lol

Boggle

Do you mind me asking exactly whats the case your taking (no names of ins co's though cos it could put your case at risk - not sure of the law). hypothetically speaking of course...

Drummer

I agree, this means that they will agree to quote everyone. However, they will simply quote extoriante premiums to those they do not not wish to insure. In which case, isnt that still discriminating on the basis of age ? They are still guilty of said offence.

Also, people should work up from low power to high power ! However, why should a man of 25 with 2yrs NCB and a man of 50 with 2yrs NCB on the same bike or car, be quoted any different ? This is the problem, not the experience or lack thereof !

HelterSkelter

Boggle wrote:

Do you mind me asking exactly whats the case your taking (no names of ins co's though cos it could put your case at risk - not sure of the law). hypothetically speaking of course...

They had a policy of refusing to quote any drivers under 25.

Boggle

Fair play to you so. Did you take that case yourself or did you contact the equality commissioner/guy?

HelterSkelter

Boggle wrote:

Fair play to you so. Did you take that case yourself or did you contact the equality commissioner/guy?

The Equality Authority.

Krusty_Clown

Well he is entitled to ride a gsxr1k and to get quoted by irish insurers, even though he may be potentially a hazard to himself (and that's generalising - for all we know he may have passed every ROSPA exam available, and be the safest rider in the country).

As common sense dictates though, passing a 25 minute bike test on a 250cc bike and waiting for two years doesn't automatically make you a safe rider on a gixxer. Proper training does.

Just imagine what happens when his insurance premium comes up for renewal next year :eek: Hope all of the insurers don't blackball him now and load his premium to the hilt!

Fair dues to him, for taking on the might of the insurers, and all on the day before MAG holds its National Motorcycle Insurance Demonstration.