Sharpie Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Does this mean that Women will now have to pay higher costs and blokes less ? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12608777 Comes into force Dec 2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marc_p Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 In an nutshell, yes . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 In a nutshell, probably not. For long. It'll change the whole insurance industry though, that's for sure. I can see telematics being brought in very soon now in place of risk profiling. You lot will love that 'big brother gone bad etc etc' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilkinson Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 I bet insurance companies will keep male premiums the same and just charge females the same as men. I doubt there will be any balance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 I bet insurance companies will keep male premiums the same and just charge females the same as men. I doubt there will be any balance. If you read the article, it says premiums for males should drop slightly while females' will rise significantly. That's only if the industry can't find another solution before December 2012 though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marc_p Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 In a nutshell, probably not. For long. It'll change the whole insurance industry though, that's for sure. I can see telematics being brought in very soon now in place of risk profiling. You lot will love that 'big brother gone bad etc etc' Surely, they will average it out, it's not that hard for insurance companies to remove the gender from the calculations as you just take a combined risk, so hence womens go up to cover the slight drop in mens insurance. I bet insurance companies will keep male premiums the same and just charge females the same as men. I doubt there will be any balance. Expect womens to go up about 25% and mens to drop 10%, it's all about risk assesment. Of course if people stopped claiming for personal injury, insurance would be 30%-40% less than what it is now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 I can see telematics being brought in very soon now in place of risk profiling. How can you see that? Do you already have some knowledge that they are planning this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 it's all about risk assesment. But think about it: if you can't use a driver's sex to assess risk even though it's proven that young men crash more than young women, then how can you use age? It blows the current system right out of the water. What they'll do is introduce real-time monitoring of your driving behaviour and build a profile from that. The AA and Zurich are investigating how to implement it as we speak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 How can you see that? Do you already have some knowledge that they are planning this? See above Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Get rid of insurance and make people pay for accidents out of their own pockets. Should raise the standard of driving especially as my idea comes with a prison sentence for being at fault and not having the ability to pay for the damage. All disputes go through a central govt. agency that takes a percentage of the claims. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dnk Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 About time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 What they'll do is introduce real-time monitoring of your driving behaviour and build a profile from that. The AA and Zurich are investigating how to implement it as we speak. Ah right - I presumed you must have heard something. It's been banded about for years within insurance but I guess they're trying to make something work now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marc_p Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Alternatively, as they do in New Zealand, have 3rd party insurance covered in your road tax, then pay the extra needed for fully comp. Although they do have a lot of 17 year olds in silly fast cars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havard Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 That's "Sheila's Wheels" fooked then..!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilkinson Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 If you read the article, it says premiums for males should drop slightly while females' will rise significantly. That's only if the industry can't find another solution before December 2012 though I read it, but I just don't believe it. Call me skeptical but they will want to make as much money as they can. No doubt they will have some lovely fudged to fit stats to support whatever they want. I agree with others comments about personal injury being the real issue with insurance prices being so high. In my line of work I often go to road traffic collisions. Normally, regardless of the speed, someone will always be out for some cash and has a sore neck and requires an ambulance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Ah right - I presumed you must have heard something. It's been banded about for years within insurance but I guess they're trying to make something work now. This situation has given them a bit of a deadline/kick up the ass. I was talking to a guy a few minutes ago from another large insurance firm who said exactly the same thing was being worked on there, too. We've all known for years that the system is flawed, but finally these companies are going to have to do something about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Wilson Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Get rid of insurance and make people pay for accidents out of their own pockets. Should raise the standard of driving especially as my idea comes with a prison sentence for being at fault and not having the ability to pay for the damage. All disputes go through a central govt. agency that takes a percentage of the claims. Not many people have the financial ability to pay damages to a surgeon of 24 who is incapacitated by their negligence. You'd be facing a multi million pound claim for loss of earnings and loss of family life et cetera. What your idea would do the prison population I don't know, the number of uninsured, effectively penniless drivers on the road could fill a prison the size of a small town In other words it's totally unworkable. The system where an insurance is displayed on the car, or as part of getting a number plate, which stays with the driver, rather than the car, the latter as in the US, is a far more practical way. If we'd had a referendum on Europe and the European Court of Human Rights farce the situation wouldn't have arisen. I'd like to see Ghadaffi nuke the place for a bit of fun before he goes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hp006 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Or do what they do in other countries. Everyone starts on a premium regardless of age gender etc etc, only slight variance is area you live and which insurance group your car fits into but if you only going 3d party does'nt matter. Then if you claim your premium goes up unless your found not at fault. Everyone elses premium remains the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Get rid of insurance and make people pay for accidents out of their own pockets. Should raise the standard of driving especially as my idea comes with a prison sentence for being at fault and not having the ability to pay for the damage. Unless it's immigrants without insurance as they're OK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snooze Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 As Gaz says, surely this sets a precedent for re-visiting the core concept. The current system is based on the premise that an insurer can use any data they collect about you or national statistics to drive their calculations - anything from car colour to occupation - if you start setting limits on which data they can and can't use, it destorys the whole concept of the "virtual demographics" which they are trying to model. Telematics isn't really a fundamental shift, though, it's just taking some of your actual driving data and including it into the algorithm. I would be worried about the basic precedent set here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
straightsix Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Get rid of insurance and make people pay for accidents out of their own pockets. Should raise the standard of driving especially as my idea comes with a prison sentence for being at fault and not having the ability to pay for the damage. All disputes go through a central govt. agency that takes a percentage of the claims. There's a vacancy in Libya for you..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marbleapple Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 As Gaz says, surely this sets a precedent for re-visiting the core concept. The current system is based on the premise that an insurer can use any data they collect about you or national statistics to drive their calculations - anything from car colour to occupation - if you start setting limits on which data they can and can't use, it destorys the whole concept of the "virtual demographics" which they are trying to model. In my opinion it is just another stupid ruling by Europe who seem to specialise in screwing things up. Of course insurance premiums should be based around risk. We wouldn't insurer a oil tanker for the same as a tug boat just because they are both boats. Speed, size, value, safety etc are all considered, why shouldn't sex of the driver be considered for cars? With regard to the idiotic suggestions of removing the need for Car Insurance, if there wasn't insurance in place then the state would need to pay for the medical treatment of the individuals and hence having insurance costs the country less than not having it. There is also the very important point that Chris made in that average Joe Bloggs could not afford to pay for the injuries they caused a 3rd party and why should the 3rd party suffer just because they were hit by a poor bloke as opposed to a rich bloke? That's "Sheila's Wheels" fooked then..!! I always wondered how they get away with being a women only insurer. I fancied trying to get a quote from them one day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Wilson Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Where could this end? Would the courts suggest that ageism is something that would stop insurance companies charging more for new life cover of a 90 year old as opposed to a 19 year old? The whole ethos of insurance is setting the risk against the cost. Just because extra risk may come from ethnicity, sex, age, occupation or what have you, doesn't make any less of a differential factor. Insurance companies have had hundreds of years to perfect this risk table. They aren't stupid and the system has worked well for generations. Play with such systems at your peril Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Wilson Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Any way, in my ideal world women would neither drive nor vote Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dnk Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Regarding car insurance is the system being used really that good. My supra with all its mods and with an agreed value policy of £13k is just over £300 My Landcruiser in stock trim with a non agreed value policy but is worth approx £7000 is 50% more to insure ? same driver, same details etc etc Makes no sense to me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.