EU Insurance Ruling

[Mark]

The EU has ruled that insurance companies can no longer discriminate on gender when selling insurance products.

The most obvious effect of this will be on car insurance, which traditionally men always pay significantly more than women.

The rules are due to take effect in December 2012.

[Daniel]

Silly. Men should pay more for insurance than men. It typically men who have the accidents where people are getting scraped up off the road and women tend to have fender benders....

[GridGirl]

I renewed my car insurance today infact and it had gone up quite significantly. Based on this, I'm not sure if I want to think about what my insurance premium will be on 1st March 2013. :s

Are insurance companies still going to be able to discriminate on age?

[Daniel]

I renewed my car insurance today infact and it had gone up quite significantly. Based on this, I'm not sure if I want to think about what my insurance premium will be on 1st March 2013. :s

Are insurance companies still going to be able to discriminate on age?

That would be ageist! Can't have that now can we?

[Mark]

Might as well just have a situation where an insurance company charges one premium regardless of anything. Would make price comparison very easy at least!

[GridGirl]

Well I can't really see Saga wanting to sell insurance to a 17 year old but we can't have ageism in this day and age. :D

[Rollo]

One of my friends who is an actuary for NRMA Insurance (National Roads and Motorists' Association) has said that over the course of a driver's lifetime, the total value that the average female driver does to motor vehicles is more than the average male driver. The spike occurs because the average female driver is likely to have more accidents and all of them individually are of lesser value.
I suspect that the average male driver is more likely to cause injury to persons and therefore rack up higher medical bills because although they have less accidents, they're more likely to be more severe when they happen.

This ruling flies in the face of statistics and such defies proper cost analysis.

[Daniel]

I suspect that the average male driver is more likely to cause injury to persons and therefore rack up higher medical bills because although they have less accidents, they're more likely to be more severe when they happen.

My thoughts too. Whilst perhaps it's silly for me to feel that I should pay more for insurance, whenever you see fatal accidents on the news both here and back in Perth, the driver was usually a male......

[Mark]

Also male drivers on average tend to do twice the mileage of a comparable female driver, and at different times of day, usually when the roads are busier.
There's a strong correlation between the amount you drive and the amount of accidents you have.

I suspect there will be increased focus on the amount of miles you do and more measures to enforce mileage restrictions.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Personally, I have never felt any injustice because I have to pay more than women for car insurance.

However, the cost of insurance for young men is ridiculous and is probably part of the reason why the number of uninsured drivers is rising, which in turn rises costs further. Anything that reduces the cost for men could result in less 'fronting' and uninsured drivers.

Interestingly, in a family that has one girl and 3 boys, my sister is beating the boys 4-1 when in comes to car crashes. I still think it's is unfair that I would have to pay, probably double what my sister does, when I have 4 years no-claims and she has had 4 crashes in 10 years. :p (I know that contradicts my first sentence)

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Also male drivers on average tend to do twice the mileage of a comparable female driver, and at different times of day, usually when the roads are busier.
There's a strong correlation between the amount you drive and the amount of accidents you have.

I suspect there will be increased focus on the amount of miles you do and more measures to enforce mileage restrictions.

Whenever you do a quote for insurance you are asked about your annual mileage, and I have noticed it can significantly increase the costs of my quotes. :erm:

[Mark]

Whenever you do a quote for insurance you are asked about your annual mileage, and I have noticed it can significantly increase the costs of my quotes. :erm:

Indeed, but I believe that at the moment insurance companies can't really check what mileage you are actually doing. I expect given this ruling they will look at ways of more strictly enforcing this.

Even then it's a blunt measure. I do a lot of miles but mostly on the motorway - the safest place to be! Much safer than someone doing the same number of miles in a city centre for example.

[MrJan]

I've always felt a bit jipped that my penis and testicles cost me hundreds of pounds each year. When I was 19 I looked at prices for me to insure a 1l FIAT Uno on TPF&T. As a bloke it was £750 but as a woman it was around £400 and something. I understand that as a young bloke I was supposedly more dangerous but that's just too much of a difference IMO. Incidentally I'm now 25 and, touch wood, accident free. Shame that my insurance still doesn't really recognise that and continues to charge silly money.

Also a shame that this ruling won't see my premium drop, just the premiums of women rise.

[Daniel]

Indeed, but I believe that at the moment insurance companies can't really check what mileage you are actually doing. I expect given this ruling they will look at ways of more strictly enforcing this.

Even then it's a blunt measure. I do a lot of miles but mostly on the motorway - the safest place to be! Much safer than someone doing the same number of miles in a city centre for example.

Whilst there is no system in place for them to check what mileage you're doing, I very much suspect that in the event of a claim they could ask you to prove your mileage. Your mileage is noted on MOT's and if they want to make it so you have to prove your yearly mileage then you'll have to comply.

[GridGirl]

I asked the insurance firm that I renewed with some questions about mileage the other day. I was getting quotes based upon 8000 miles per annum. The kind person on the telephone said I could reduce my premium if I said I'd only be doing 7500 miles per annum. I soon changed that. :D

[Daniel]

I asked the insurance firm that I renewed with some questions about mileage the other day. I was getting quotes based upon 8000 miles per annum. The kind person on the telephone said I could reduce my premium if I said I'd only be doing 7500 miles per annum. I soon changed that. :D

I can't imagine they'd quibble too much over 500 miles difference, but if it were 5000? Perhaps they would.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Whenever I try and negotiate with insurers over the phone all I ever get in reply is 'computer says no'.

[Daniel]

Whenever I try and negotiate with insurers over the phone all I ever get in reply is 'computer says no'.

We've got a Mulitcar ([parrot voice]multicar! multicar![/parrot voice]) with Admiral and they break the price in the policy down for the individual cars and I said "well we've been quoted x amount by another insurer for the Fiat, what can you do?" and they matched it.

I would reccomend going through a cashback site like http://www.topcashback.co.uk/ or http://www.quidco.com/ as you'll get paid cashback which is more or less what the insurer would have paid to the comparison site for bringing your business in. As a non insurance based example, we recently changed our gas and electric over to EDF and got exactly the same price as we would have through a comparison site, but we got £50 cashback :) In total with the cashback and lower cost it amounts to a saving of about 25% on what we were paying before!

[Eki]

I wonder if they some day will forbid the insurance companies from discriminating based on employer and rumors. After Nokia and Microsoft recently announced their cooperation there have been rumors about huge lay-offs at Nokia. Because of the rumors, Genworth Financial stopped insuring Nokia employees' loans against unemployment and compared Nokia employees to smoldering houses, saying they don't insure smoldering houses against fire either.

[Daniel]

I wonder if they some day will forbid the insurance companies from discriminating based on employer and rumors. After Nokia and Microsoft recently announced their cooperation there have been rumors about huge lay-offs at Nokia. Because of the rumors, Genworth Financial stopped insuring Nokia employees' loans against unemployment and compared Nokia employees to smoldering houses, saying they don't insure smoldering houses against fire either.

Well I think if someone has been told that there is consultation with regards to redundancies then it's only right that they shouldn't be insured for unemployment but if all there is to go on are rumours then that's not on.....

What does the law say about it there Eki?

[Alexamateo]

I wonder if they some day will forbid the insurance companies from discriminating based on employer and rumors. After Nokia and Microsoft recently announced their cooperation there have been rumors about huge lay-offs at Nokia. Because of the rumors, Genworth Financial stopped insuring Nokia employees' loans against unemployment and compared Nokia employees to smoldering houses, saying they don't insure smoldering houses against fire either.

Couldn't that situation be covered by a rider on the policy? i.e. no unemployment coverage for the first 3 or 6 months. I know when I changed jobs and started buying my own health insurance, there was a stipulation that there would be no maternity benefits for the first 9 months. In other words, my wife couldn't get pregnant and run and go buy insurance after the fact. That would prevent someone from knowing about impending layoffs and then buying the insurance only then.

[christophulus]

I'm a bit torn on this one, but I think it's a good idea overall. I shouldn't have to pay more just because some men drive like idiots, but insurance does need to be based on potential risk, to some extent. Otherwise you'd have to pay the same for house insurance regardless of the crime levels in your area, or the same for travel insurance for a weekend break in Paris as a weekend away skiing, and so on. And it'll always been at the higher price won't it... :p

Having said that, the gap between male and female insurance premiums at the minute is shocking. I could cope with a slight difference, but I've had my licence for five years, and was quoted about £2,000 for cover on a basic 1.2 (no NCD, I haven't owned my own car before). Simply adding my fiancée to the policy as a named driver (she's only had her licence two years and openly admits she hates driving) dropped the price to £1,200. Sure, there should be a discount for driving a less powerful car or having more no claims discount, but having such a discrepancy based solely on someone's gender is unfair.

[Garry Walker]

EU stupidity strikes again. There is no way around it - young males are high-risk drivers and cause more accidents, despite on average being much more skillful drivers than women.

[GridGirl]

Having said that, the gap between male and female insurance premiums at the minute is shocking. I could cope with a slight difference, but I've had my licence for five years, and was quoted about £2,000 for cover on a basic 1.2 (no NCD, I haven't owned my own car before). Simply adding my fiancée to the policy as a named driver (she's only had her licence two years and openly admits she hates driving) dropped the price to £1,200. Sure, there should be a discount for driving a less powerful car or having more no claims discount, but having such a discrepancy based solely on someone's gender is unfair.

I know how you feel. Until a year ago I insured my partner as a named driver on my car insurance. This time last year the cheapest insurer wanted an extra £250 to add him to my policy so I took him off it. It really wasn't worth paying the extra for the minimal amount of times he drives my car. On the other hand, my partner insures me on his car and it drops his premium by much more than £250.

I don't think being female or male will make that much of a difference other than the fact that all premiums are likely to go up. The renewal I just paid was 38% more than the amount I paid last year. So much for another claim free year of motoring.

[Daniel]

EU stupidity strikes again. There is no way around it - young males are high-risk drivers and cause more accidents, despite on average being much more skillful drivers than women.

The problem seems to be that when a woman isn't skillful, she slows down, whereas us men just drive in spite of the lack of skill :p

[Daniel]

I know how you feel. Until a year ago I insured my partner as a named driver on my car insurance. This time last year the cheapest insurer wanted an extra £250 to add him to my policy so I took him off it. It really wasn't worth paying the extra for the minimal amount of times he drives my car. On the other hand, my partner insures me on his car and it drops his premium by much more than £250.

I don't think being female or male will make that much of a difference other than the fact that all premiums are likely to go up. The renewal I just paid was 38% more than the amount I paid last year. So much for another claim free year of motoring.

Must be down to the car. Just checked the 500 and I think it's about £40 more expensive, up from £450 to just under 490. Wonder what Caroline's policy will do......

[Rollo]

What happens to Sheila's Wheels?
http://www.sheilaswheels.com/
Even they themselves say that they sell "Insurance designed with women in mind!"

Would you like to see this obviously discriminatory company closed forever?
http://www.thefatcontroller.co.uk/portfolio/albums/userpics/churchill_dog-oh_yes.jpg

[GridGirl]

Must be down to the car. Just checked the 500 and I think it's about £40 more expensive, up from £450 to just under 490. Wonder what Caroline's policy will do......

To be fair my policy has only gone up by £121 and is still cheap now when all things are considered. It still doesnt mean that I'm going to stop moaning about it though. :p

[Mark]

To be fair my policy has only gone up by £121 and is still cheap now when all things are considered. It still doesnt mean that I'm going to stop moaning about it though. :p

Only gone up by £121 :s hock: Back in the day you could get a years insurance for £121..

[GridGirl]

I wish Mark, although my car insurance does now cost more than my car tax unlike last year. :p

[Daniel]

I wish Mark, although my car insurance does now cost more than my car tax unlike last year. :p

Jeez I wish I could get insurance for either of our cars for anywhere near the price of the tax :p The 500 is only £30 to tax and the Subaru is £205. I think all up it cost us £800 up front for a policy to cover both which isn't bad but I suspect that'll be closer to £900 *grumble*

[Garry Walker]

The problem seems to be that when a woman isn't skillful, she slows down, whereas us men just drive in spite of the lack of skill :p

Absolutely correct. Most young men seem to have this idea that they are all Michael Schumachers and that they have to show it to everyone. Just a testosterone and ego thing.

[MrJan]

Oh boo hoo, £900 to insure 2 cars for 2 drivers :p : Few quid shy of £600 for me to insure the MR2 when I renewed in January, although admittedly that allows for 15,000 miles and business use for myself.

[Daniel]

That's business use for both drivers on both cars too :p

[Neil - RSA]

Hello guys,

New to the forum but already laughing at the topic. ;) Insurance is always going to be a hassle.. especially for men. In South Africa we sit with the same problem. Male premiums are much higher then women as they are a lower risk due to statistics. But statistics also show that

- there is 1 women driver for every 10 men (if not more)
- Yes young males are high risk. I remember my younger days when I just received my drivers license.. it was fun trying to see how fast you can go. But looking at my younger sister and being passenger in her vehicle it scares the live out of me. Don't get me wrong there are very good women drivers but men just have a natural feeling to it.. well most do for my 2c.

Luckily not all insurers have the same criteria when looking at the risk. Some insurers would rather look at the value of vehicle + what its used for. They provide standard premium based on the value and should younger male (usually under 25) have an accident they just provide an bigger excess at the end of the day.

The same counts for racing insurance. The insurer looks at the value of the vehicle and what type of class the driver is racing in. For instance Rally Insurance is much higher that Track Cover as the risk & value of the vehicle are much higher! Should the driver only have 1 years experience then again higher excess would be applicable.

Just my 2c.. ;)

[gloomyDAY]

I think this is an instance where we can look for guidance from out Middle-Eastern counterparts.

Just make like the Saudis and ban women from driving altogether. Easy, no? :p

[driveace]

having been a driving examiner,and driving instructor for over 50 years,i find generally males are easier to teach than females.And that most males are better drivers than females,but not nesissarily safer drivers.Most young males drive like they can walk on water,and i see far more girls texting,and on the phone whilst driving than males.The big problem i see is that young males will buy a cheap car,not insure it and if stopped and prosecuted and the car is crushed they will have lost 3/4 hundred pounds,cheaper than paying insurance.
Personally my own insurance for 3 cars ,fully comprehensive is less than £500 for all 3 cars.,
This is for a Merc C220,a Sorento 2.5 XT,and a Fiesta 1.8td which includes for driving tuition.!

[Daniel]

having been a driving examiner,and driving instructor for over 50 years,i find generally males are easier to teach than females.And that most males are better drivers than females,but not nesissarily safer drivers.Most young males drive like they can walk on water,and i see far more girls texting,and on the phone whilst driving than males.The big problem i see is that young males will buy a cheap car,not insure it and if stopped and prosecuted and the car is crushed they will have lost 3/4 hundred pounds,cheaper than paying insurance.
Personally my own insurance for 3 cars ,fully comprehensive is less than £500 for all 3 cars.,
This is for a Merc C220,a Sorento 2.5 XT,and a Fiesta 1.8td which includes for driving tuition.!

Yes but how old are you? :p Our insurance is £800 for two people for two cars, one of them being a group 19 insurance car under the old 1-20 group system. I think that's alright :)

[GridGirl]

Daniel, just think of it as something to look forward to in later life. That is unless we get an ageism EU ruling before we reach a grand old age. ;)

[tfp]

Apparently, in australia, car insurance is optional:-) Which is a much better idea IMO, even though I have no idea how it works if you have a crash.
I just begrudge paying car insurance:-)
This is why my imprezas value is only half that here in britain than what it would be down under. Bah, Humbug, Grumble, mumble

[Rollo]

Apparently, in australia, car insurance is optional:-) Which is a much better idea IMO, even though I have no idea how it works if you have a crash.


In NSW 3rd Party Personal Injury Insurance is compulsory (and is otherwise called a green slip). You can't even pay your motor tax until you've first got a green slip and a roadworthy certificate (if applicable).
3rd Party Property Only Insurance is quite common if you happen to own a cruddy car. That would mean that if someone drove their $500 Hyundai Excel into the side of a Rolls-Royce Cornish, then the Rolls-Royce would be covered but the Hyundai car wouldn't.

But that only works for NSW. Every state and territory is like its own little world and the rules are different.

[Mark]

Apparently, in australia, car insurance is optional:-) Which is a much better idea IMO, even though I have no idea how it works if you have a crash.
I just begrudge paying car insurance:-)
This is why my imprezas value is only half that here in britain than what it would be down under. Bah, Humbug, Grumble, mumble

Not exactly, they have a different system, basically to put it in UK terms, they pay their third party insurance in with their car tax. Then they can buy comprehensive as well.

Personally I think combining insurance and tax is a good idea, I've said for a while that car tax should be scrapped and replaced with a car on car insurance, it would make it all much easier!

[tfp]

In NSW 3rd Party Personal Injury Insurance is compulsory (and is otherwise called a green slip). You can't even pay your motor tax until you've first got a green slip and a roadworthy certificate (if applicable).
3rd Party Property Only Insurance is quite common if you happen to own a cruddy car. That would mean that if someone drove their $500 Hyundai Excel into the side of a Rolls-Royce Cornish, then the Rolls-Royce would be covered but the Hyundai car wouldn't.

But that only works for NSW. Every state and territory is like its own little world and the rules are different.

Aah I've got ya. My mate in Brisbane said something about you dont have to insure your car, only yourself. Thats cleared it up now:-) A much better idea, I reckon!

[Rollo]

Aah I've got ya. My mate in Brisbane said something about you dont have to insure your car, only yourself. Thats cleared it up now:-) A much better idea, I reckon!

I think that you'd be bonkers not to have 3rd Party Property Insurance. If you had an accident as the at-fault driver, you'd then be personally liable for the damage caused. Even a minor thud against something like a Hyundai i20 would still cost several hundreds of dollars; that's a gamble I'm not prepared to take.

[Daniel]

I think that you'd be bonkers not to have 3rd Party Property Insurance. If you had an accident as the at-fault driver, you'd then be personally liable for the damage caused. Even a minor thud against something like a Hyundai i20 would still cost several hundreds of dollars; that's a gamble I'm not prepared to take.

I get the feeling though, that people running around in Oz without 3rd party insurance is nowhere near as common as in the UK.

[Mark]

If you are hit by an uninsured driver in the UK you will usually still get your car fixed, there is a fund which insurance companies pay into to help with this.

I'm not sure what happens to uninsured drivers and if they are perused for the cost

[Bezza]

Silly. Men should pay more for insurance than men. It typically men who have the accidents where people are getting scraped up off the road and women tend to have fender benders....

That is questionable.

What they are saying, correctly, is you can't tar everybody with the same brush.

From my experience the near misses I have had have come from either a) women pulling out at roundabouts without looking, b) young lads in souped cars driving like idiots.

So, why should responsible male drivers pay more than women when they have no evidence they are a bad driver.

It is about time they sorted it out.

[Bezza]

Absolutely correct. Most young men seem to have this idea that they are all Michael Schumachers and that they have to show it to everyone. Just a testosterone and ego thing.

Yeah, they seem to drive like they are trying to make up for something...! Apparently Daniel does this a lot ;)

[Mark]

When you think about it, it's reasonable that if you are going to put people into 'boxes' based on risk, they should be a smaller sized box than half the population.

[Daniel]

That is questionable.

What they are saying, correctly, is you can't tar everybody with the same brush.

From my experience the near misses I have had have come from either a) women pulling out at roundabouts without looking, b) young lads in souped cars driving like idiots.

So, why should responsible male drivers pay more than women when they have no evidence they are a bad driver.

It is about time they sorted it out.

I quite agree, you should propose a new question for the insurance companies to ask

Question 1: are you
A: Female
B: Male

If A proceed to question 2, if B proceed to question 3

Question 2: So you're a wimmin innit? Are you
A: An attentive driver
B: A dozey bint

If A you will pay lower premiums, if B you will pay more money for your insurance. Proceed to question 4

Question 3: Are you
A: an attentive driver
B: A yound lad driving around in a souped up car who drives like an idiot

If A you will pay lower premiums, if B you will pay more money for your insurance. Proceed to question 4

Question 4: Are you
A: A hard working heterosexual white person who is opressed in the name of political correctness gone mad?!?!?!?!?!
B: A gay lesbian black asian Welsh Scottish Northern Irelander who's from Poland?

If A you will pay more money for your insurance, if B, don't worry mate, the government will be taking care of your insurance.

It's about time you used your grey matter and stopped proposing that things need to be "sorted out" when certain things in life will never be 100% fair.

[Daniel]

When you think about it, it's reasonable that if you are going to put people into 'boxes' based on risk, they should be a smaller sized box than half the population.

But sex is merely one of many factors which insurance companies use to work out your insurance premium.

[Bezza]

I quite agree, you should propose a new question for the insurance companies to ask

Question 1: are you
A: Female
B: Male

If A proceed to question 2, if B proceed to question 3

Question 2: So you're a wimmin innit? Are you
A: An attentive driver
B: A dozey bint

If A you will pay lower premiums, if B you will pay more money for your insurance. Proceed to question 4

Question 3: Are you
A: an attentive driver
B: A yound lad driving around in a souped up car who drives like an idiot

If A you will pay lower premiums, if B you will pay more money for your insurance. Proceed to question 4

Question 4: Are you
A: A hard working heterosexual white person who is opressed in the name of political correctness gone mad?!?!?!?!?!
B: A gay lesbian black asian Welsh Scottish Northern Irelander who's from Poland?

If A you will pay more money for your insurance, if B, don't worry mate, the government will be taking care of your insurance.

It's about time you used your grey matter and stopped proposing that things need to be "sorted out" when certain things in life will never be 100% fair.

If that was an attempt at humour, it failed miserably.

I don't see why it can't done more fairly. Tarring people with the same brush should not be tolerated. I am happy that they are making an effort to take away this "positive discrimination".

[Daniel]

If that was an attempt at humour, it failed miserably.

I don't see why it can't done more fairly. Tarring people with the same brush should not be tolerated. I am happy that they are making an effort to take away this "positive discrimination".

You are the perfect example of the person who said "Why can't things be better?!?!?!" and then goes on to provide no actual workable way in which things could be made better.

[Bezza]

You are the perfect example of the person who said "Why can't things be better?!?!?!" and then goes on to provide no actual workable way in which things could be made better.

Why did you bring up topics from other discussions to use in this one, when they are not at all relevant. Probably because you are getting desperate. Your post earlier was abysmal.

Women asked for equal rights in the past, quite rightly - as they were prejudiced against. They couldn't even vote! Thankfully this was sorted, but now we found ourselves full circle. Women only ever asked to be equal - car insurance is an example where the woman has been "better" than the man for some time. It is about time they sorted it out once and for all and the EU insurance is ruling is absolutely the correct step. I don't see why you have a problem with people being equal, Daniel?

All the women I have spoken to seem to think the ruling is fair and correct. All usual the over-sensitives of the forum are getting their knickers in a twist. Going to the pub with you would be like hell on Earth.

[BDunnell]

Going to the pub with you would be like hell on Earth.

Believe me, the feeling is entirely mutual. I would, however, say that your apparent dislike of any group of people who are in any sense different from yourself in not being a heterosexual white male, your feeling that all other such individuals are given special treatment despite this flying in the face of any real-life examples I have ever come across, and your overly aggressive manner, would seem to make you perfect for the career you desired in the police, so I would appeal the decision if I were you.

[Daniel]

Why did you bring up topics from other discussions to use in this one, when they are not at all relevant. Probably because you are getting desperate. Your post earlier was abysmal.

Women asked for equal rights in the past, quite rightly - as they were prejudiced against. They couldn't even vote! Thankfully this was sorted, but now we found ourselves full circle. Women only ever asked to be equal - car insurance is an example where the woman has been "better" than the man for some time. It is about time they sorted it out once and for all and the EU insurance is ruling is absolutely the correct step. I don't see why you have a problem with people being equal, Daniel?

All the women I have spoken to seem to think the ruling is fair and correct. All usual the over-sensitives of the forum are getting their knickers in a twist. Going to the pub with you would be like hell on Earth.

Well the women you've spoken to must be different to most of those interviewed on the news or those that I've spoken to.....

At the end of the day, anyone who knows anything about insurance knows it's down to risk and it's a proven factor that men have more big accidents than women and this is why they were and should still remain more expensive to ensure. It's like a smoker having to pay more for health cover, of course they should pay more because they're at a higher risk of having lung cancer and other illnesses. But in your world everyone should all be equal apparently!

You're exactly the sort of person you accused me of being when you said that I only voted Labour because they let people like me in the country easily. This all despite nothing that the Condem's or your beloved British Nazi Party have proposed would have any impact on me being allowed in. You happily criticise the EU when they do things you don't like and say how useless they are then you're willing to say how fantastic they are when they do something you feel will benefit you.

You're a massive hypocrite Bezza.

[Bezza]

Well the women you've spoken to must be different to most of those interviewed on the news or those that I've spoken to.....

At the end of the day, anyone who knows anything about insurance knows it's down to risk and it's a proven factor that men have more big accidents than women and this is why they were and should still remain more expensive to ensure. It's like a smoker having to pay more for health cover, of course they should pay more because they're at a higher risk of having lung cancer and other illnesses. But in your world everyone should all be equal apparently!

You're exactly the sort of person you accused me of being when you said that I only voted Labour because they let people like me in the country easily. This all despite nothing that the Condem's or your beloved British Nazi Party have proposed would have any impact on me being allowed in. You happily criticise the EU when they do things you don't like and say how useless they are then you're willing to say how fantastic they are when they do something you feel will benefit you.

You're a massive hypocrite Bezza.

I think stating that I love the BNP is a step too far pal, but it pretty much sums up the way you think.

You are BDunnell are like two peas in a pod. Eager to jump on someone just for having an opinion different to their own. Of course, I must be racist / a nazi / homophobic etc JUST because I don't agree with your excessively left-wing view of everything.

We are not even talking about the stuff you have just posted yet you decide to bring into the conversation.

Your smoker analogy doesn't make sense. I agree with you that people who smoke should pay more health insurance. However, that does not correlate to car insurance at all. People who have crashes should pay more? Or just because I am a man and some idiots younger than me have had a crash whilst I have a clean license, I should pay more?

Your last paragraph is deplorable and BDunnell you are almost as bad.

We are allowed to have differences of opinion in this country you know. Sadly if you two were in charge, we really wouldn't be allowed that priviledge.

You can have the last word, Daniel (as always) as this is the last I have to say on this matter.

[Daniel]

I think stating that I love the BNP is a step too far pal, but it pretty much sums up the way you think.

You are BDunnell are like two peas in a pod. Eager to jump on someone just for having an opinion different to their own. Of course, I must be racist / a nazi / homophobic etc JUST because I don't agree with your excessively left-wing view of everything.

We are not even talking about the stuff you have just posted yet you decide to bring into the conversation.

Your smoker analogy doesn't make sense. I agree with you that people who smoke should pay more health insurance. However, that does not correlate to car insurance at all. People who have crashes should pay more? Or just because I am a man and some idiots younger than me have had a crash whilst I have a clean license, I should pay more?

Your last paragraph is deplorable and BDunnell you are almost as bad.

We are allowed to have differences of opinion in this country you know. Sadly if you two were in charge, we really wouldn't be allowed that priviledge.

You can have the last word, Daniel (as always) as this is the last I have to say on this matter.

Boohoo.

If you knew anything about insurance you know it's all about risk and you don't raise someone's premium's after the event. If someone lives on a floodplain the insurance company doesn't wait till there's a flood till they charge the person on the floodplain more than the person living on the hill. Personally I think it's wrong to penalise low risk people to supposedly iron out some perceived unfairness which is actually justified.

So just because Ben and myself don't agree with you then were' excessively left wing?

[markabilly]

Going to the pub with you would be like hell on Earth.

Daniel would definetly be a trip, as i magine after a few drinks, life would be scary.

Dunnel on the other hand, BORING.

[markabilly]

Boohoo.

If you knew anything about insurance you know it's all about risk and you don't raise someone's premium's after the event. ?

I need you to talk to my insurance company, as they are very strongly insisting to the contrary after a certain family member wrecked out....

[BDunnell]

We are allowed to have differences of opinion in this country you know.

Indeed. So, when I see you writing that minorities of various types receive special treatment, am I supposed to just let it go even when I know your comments to be nonsensical and completely lacking in foundation other than hearsay?

[markabilly]

Indeed. So, when I see you writing that minorities of various types receive special treatment, am I supposed to just let it go even when I know your comments to be nonsensical and completely lacking in foundation other than hearsay?
Like I just said......

[BDunnell]

Like I just said......

So you would just let something you disagree with vehemently go, would you?

[Bezza]

Indeed. So, when I see you writing that minorities of various types receive special treatment, am I supposed to just let it go even when I know your comments to be nonsensical and completely lacking in foundation other than hearsay?

I am not asking anybody to agree with me. I am just sick of this elitest attitude that appears when something is said that they don't agree with, dropping down to name-calling and directly accusing somebody of being something they are not. You have done that yourself, BDunnell, and you have absolutely nothing to back it up with. I know what you are insinuating, and it is this attitude that I really don't like. It happens more and more thesedays and no wonder people are scared to say what they think.

My comments are clearly not nonsensical as I was agreeing to a ruling made by the EU! What further back up do you need?

[MrJan]

My comments are clearly not nonsensical as I was agreeing to a ruling made by the EU! What further back up do you need?

I sit on the fence with this one, but you can't go using EU politicians to back up your argument :D :p : It's like talking about sportsmanship and then saying "My mate Flavio agrees".

[BDunnell]

I am not asking anybody to agree with me. I am just sick of this elitest attitude that appears when something is said that they don't agree with, dropping down to name-calling and directly accusing somebody of being something they are not. You have done that yourself, BDunnell, and you have absolutely nothing to back it up with. I know what you are insinuating, and it is this attitude that I really don't like. It happens more and more thesedays and no wonder people are scared to say what they think.

Well, clearly I'm not scared to say what I think. And given that you appear to have nothing bar anecdotal evidence for your allegations of positive discrimination, it is a bit rich for you to suggest that I have nothing with which to 'back up' my comments. You say that minorities of one sort or another are constantly given a leg-up by way of positive discrimination. I stated that my experience is that this assertion is untrue. Were it accurate, I might expect to have experienced some of this positive discrimination, as would various friends of mine, but they haven't. What's wrong with my saying that?

[markabilly]

Well, clearly I'm not scared to say what I think. And given that you appear to have nothing bar anecdotal evidence for your allegations of positive discrimination, it is a bit rich for you to suggest that I have nothing with which to 'back up' my comments. You say that minorities of one sort or another are constantly given a leg-up by way of positive discrimination. I stated that my experience is that this assertion is untrue. Were it accurate, I might expect to have experienced some of this positive discrimination, as would various friends of mine, but they haven't. What's wrong with my saying that?

I said boring, because you come across with this elite, intellectual snobbery, while engaging in provocation and name calling. Scared got nothing to do with it. You should have a litttle fun; it probably will not kill you.


Oh well, got more important things to do. Like get a second job, so my kid can keep wrecking the truck. I guess Daniel is not calling those a**hos at my insurance company and telling them how wrong they are.

Daniel, all talk and no action!!!!!!!!!

[Daniel]

I need you to talk to my insurance company, as they are very strongly insisting to the contrary after a certain family member wrecked out....

Sorry what I mean to say is that if someone is a risk before the accident because they fit into a group which is likely to have an accident then it's right to make them pay more, if they have an accident that's their fault then they should be made to pay more.

I do (honestly) apologise for not being clearer in making my point Markabilly.

I just don't think it's right, wise or sensible for for what Bezza seems to suggest which is for there to be no "discrimination" upon the basis of whether or not someone is in certain proven risk categories. It'd be like having a 18 year old who's just got their licence and a 30 year old who has just got their licence and making them pay the same when the statistics say that the 18 year old is far more likely to have a serious accident.

[Daniel]

My comments are clearly not nonsensical as I was agreeing to a ruling made by the EU! What further back up do you need?

That's specious reasoning.....

So if the EU says for you to jump off a cliff will you do so?
If the EU dictate that every friday morning we should all get up, put our pants on our head, stand in a black forest gateau and sing Girls just wanna have fun by Cyndi Lauper then should we just do this blindly?
etc etc etc

[BDunnell]

That's specious reasoning.....

So if the EU says for you to jump off a cliff will you do so?
If the EU dictate that every friday morning we should all get up, put our pants on our head, stand in a black forest gateau and sing Girls just wanna have fun by Cyndi Lauper then should we just do this blindly?
etc etc etc

To be fair, nowhere did he say that every EU ruling is right and worthwhile on the basis that one might be.

[Daniel]

To be fair, nowhere did he say that every EU ruling is right and worthwhile on the basis that one might be.

To be fair I may have misread his post :p

[Mark]

That's specious reasoning.....

So if the EU says for you to jump off a cliff will you do so?
If the EU dictate that every friday morning we should all get up, put our pants on our head, stand in a black forest gateau and sing Girls just wanna have fun by Cyndi Lauper then should we just do this blindly?
etc etc etc

It sounds like a good plan to me.

[BDunnell]

It sounds like a good plan to me.

Go and lobby your 'local' MEP now!

[markabilly]

Sorry what I mean to say is that if someone is a risk before the accident because they fit into a group which is likely to have an accident then it's right to make them pay more, if they have an accident that's their fault then they should be made to pay more.

I do (honestly) apologise for not being clearer in making my point Markabilly.

.

oh YEAH, that really helps...I point you out to the mean nasty insurance company, and then you say this.....now I will have to get THREE jobs to pay those premimums, unless they cancel me....in which case, I will just have to go bare..................girls just wanna have fun, oh yeah,

[Bezza]

Well, clearly I'm not scared to say what I think. And given that you appear to have nothing bar anecdotal evidence for your allegations of positive discrimination, it is a bit rich for you to suggest that I have nothing with which to 'back up' my comments. You say that minorities of one sort or another are constantly given a leg-up by way of positive discrimination. I stated that my experience is that this assertion is untrue. Were it accurate, I might expect to have experienced some of this positive discrimination, as would various friends of mine, but they haven't. What's wrong with my saying that?

I don't mind hearing you say what you think - that is the whole point! You can say what you want! I don't like people who say something and then just shoot down other people because they don't agree.

When it comes to statistics we all know the saying "lies, damn lies and statistics". Premiums based on statistical evidence alone is wrong. And it only takes into account the statistics they want to. Just like politicians do!

[BDunnell]

I don't mind hearing you say what you think - that is the whole point! You can say what you want! I don't like people who say something and then just shoot down other people because they don't agree.

Exactly what you have done, without any statistical evidence to back yourself up.

[Bezza]

Exactly what you have done, without any statistical evidence to back yourself up.

I haven't shot anybody down at all. I stated my opinion and then Daniel, and then you jumped all over it with a fair amount of abuse. If you scroll up you will see what I mean! If you base your comments like this then I have to take everything you say with a pinch of salt.

And furthermore the discussion was about car insurance only. It was Daniel and then YOU who brought other topics into this debate that were completely irrelevant, presumably to help you with your viewpoint here. Can you not have an independent debate on this topic without bringing conjecture into the conversation? Try and keep the discussion on track in future. According to Daniel I support the BNP - apparently because I think men and women should be equal ! Does that really make sense to you? Do you agree with this?

[Daniel]

According to Daniel I support the BNP - apparently because I think men and women should be equal !

Not because you want equality, because you're ignorant and think that Britain should only have straight white British people in it.

[GridGirl]

Daniel, your begining to sound like a real bully on this thread in my opinion. Bezza, for what it's worth you don't and never have ever appeared to be a BNP fanatic. Also, there is nothing wrong with agreeing with certain aspects of BNP thinking not that it deserves any discussion on this topic.

[Daniel]

Daniel, your begining to sound like a real bully on this thread in my opinion. Bezza, for what it's worth you don't and never have ever appeared to be a BNP fanatic. Also, there is nothing wrong with agreeing with certain aspects of BNP thinking not that it deserves any discussion on this topic.

Have you read some of the drivel he posts about immigrants though? I suspect he's the sort of person who thinks your dad doesn't have the right to be here.....

[GridGirl]

Daniel, in my opinion you seem to have seized on something and just won't let it go. Not that it's relevant for a car insurance thread but yes my dad is an imigrant. He came to England on a Saturday, started work on Monday and has always been in work other than a period where he was fully retired. Although he is an immigrant and I am the daughter of an immigrant we both have certain issues with the immigration policy of the UK. It's not perfect, never has been and could certainly be improved. This doesn't mean either of us are BNP freaks. The BNP have a couple of good ideas. It's just a shame that it is ruined by all the rest of the b**ls**t.

Now....back to the topic of car insurance....

[Daniel]

Daniel, in my opinion you seem to have seized on something and just won't let it go. Not that it's relevant for a car insurance thread but yes my dad is an imigrant. He came to England on a Saturday, started work on Monday and has always been in work other than a period where he was fully retired. Although he is an immigrant and I am the daughter of an immigrant we both have certain issues with the immigration policy of the UK. It's not perfect, never has been and could certainly be improved. This doesn't mean either of us are BNP freaks. The BNP have a couple of good ideas. It's just a shame that it is ruined by all the rest of the b**ls**t.

Now....back to the topic of car insurance....

Bezza is the one who went on about irrelevant stuff first tbh. I merely brought up his massive issues with minorities to show certain shortcomings in Bezza's ability to think rationally.

[Mark]

Back to the issue of car insurance or the thread gets locked.

[GridGirl]

Yes boss!!! :p

To get this thread back on topic I just obtained a couple of insurance quotes from Directline purely because they have an easy form to fill in and they are not my current insurance provider. I've used the exact same details as when I remewed my insurance earlier this month for car, mileage, no claims etc. The first using the same details as my own insurance came out at £654.02. Incidently it was much more than I actually paid but was also the same price if I used the title Mrs, Ms an Dr. I then changed my title to Mr and the premium went up to £864.96. That is an increase of £210.94 or 32.25% derived purely from changing the title. Thats quite scary seeing as I am over aged 25 where I'd always assumed car insurance between male and female drivers becomes a bit more comparable.

Anyone else want to play car insurance roulette? :D

[Retro Formula 1]

Spinning nowwwwwww.................

Yep, changed Mr to Mrs and £100 saving.

[Bezza]

Originally posted by Daniel
Bezza is the one who went on about irrelevant stuff first tbh. I merely brought up his massive issues with minorities to show certain shortcomings in Bezza's ability to think rationally.

I don't think so! :


Originally posted by Daniel

Daniel
Originally Posted by Bezza
That is questionable.

What they are saying, correctly, is you can't tar everybody with the same brush.

From my experience the near misses I have had have come from either a) women pulling out at roundabouts without looking, b) young lads in souped cars driving like idiots.

So, why should responsible male drivers pay more than women when they have no evidence they are a bad driver.

It is about time they sorted it out.
I quite agree, you should propose a new question for the insurance companies to ask

Question 1: are you
A: Female
B: Male

If A proceed to question 2, if B proceed to question 3

Question 2: So you're a wimmin innit? Are you
A: An attentive driver
B: A dozey bint

If A you will pay lower premiums, if B you will pay more money for your insurance. Proceed to question 4

Question 3: Are you
A: an attentive driver
B: A yound lad driving around in a souped up car who drives like an idiot

If A you will pay lower premiums, if B you will pay more money for your insurance. Proceed to question 4

Question 4: Are you
A: A hard working heterosexual white person who is opressed in the name of political correctness gone mad?!?!?!?!?!
B: A gay lesbian black asian Welsh Scottish Northern Irelander who's from Poland?

If A you will pay more money for your insurance, if B, don't worry mate, the government will be taking care of your insurance.

It's about time you used your grey matter and stopped proposing that things need to be "sorted out" when certain things in life will never be 100% fair.

That clears that one up.

Also you need have a long hard look at yourself if you think I want just white British people in the country. In fact I am quite angered and upset. You have simply taken an opinion I have and completely twisted it into something else.

--------------------

Not got much more to say on this matter - I've said my piece about car insurance and don't want to continue to stray off topic as Mark said.

As it happens I just renewed mine with Admiral and got a healthy discount despite an unsettled claim (guy went into back of me - but no witnesses argh!). I am happy with them.

[MrJan]

Holy titballs!!

Direct Line, 25 year old Mr Barry Fullalove with 3 years no claims, doing 15,000 miles in an MR2 - premium= £954.00
Direct Line, 25 year old Mrs Barry Fullalove with 3 years no claims, doing 15,000 miles in an MR2 - premium=£660.38

Incidentally my actual premium (was given by Admiral but matched by Bell, as they're the same company) was less than both of those, and includes business miles for the policy holder too.

[Daniel]

I don't think so! :



That clears that one up.

Certainly does, egg is being wiped from my face as we speak but I tend to get confused when people jibber jabber about stuff ;)

Anyway no more to say on that matter.