Insurance discrimination - has it gone too far?

It IS discrimination. Insurance is absolutely everything to do with discrimination, based on claims history. And it is right.
 
Dano said:
It's justified discrimination, though I'd prefer to see a scheme where people have to pay a higher premium and then get a % back for no claims, thus penalising those who make claims more.
Click to expand...

I think you fail to see how insurance works.

I've never had an issue with insurance - I paid £1000 to insure my first car, and haven't paid more than that to insure a car since. In fact, I now insure two high grouped cars for little more than £1k.
 
[TW]Fox;16806510 said:
If you cannot understand their logic then I am lost for words.

Young guys crash cars lots. This costs insurance companies lots of money. They therefore charge young guys lots of money to insure against the risk of them crashing.

It is that simple!
Click to expand...

on a money making aspect yes, i can see. But on a saftey aspect side of it and saving lives ect, it makes me wonder why no-one has questioned it :confused:
 
The only realistic alternative is to have 3rd party insurance built in to something like the road tax, without that you are pretty much stuck with the risk-based premiums.
 
classicVin said:
on a money making aspect yes, i can see. But on a saftey aspect side of it and saving lives ect, it makes me wonder why no-one has questioned it :confused:
Click to expand...

But insurance is nothing to do with safety or saving lives, it's about money.

Women have small carpark dings, couple of hundred quid for a sprayed bumper and an indicator.
Men put their LCR backwards through a hedge and into somebodies garage, killing their dog in the process.

These situations cost different amounts to put right.
 
You're more likely to unintenionally park a car in a hedge than your girlfriend is so they don't want your business, hence the high quotes. Whether you think this is fair or not is irrelevant as unfortunately their actuary department don't make recommendations based on whether you're upset or not.

Blame other teenage male drivers not the insurance companies.
 
What I think is a shame is that the insurance companies seem content to keep pushing up the premiums and blaming the drivers as well as cost of non-insured drivers rather than looking at viable ways in which young drivers can reduce their premiums - the Pass Plus used to be something considered but these days it seems to have gone out of fashion these days and is hardly mentioned so I can only assume that insurers are now ignoring it. It seems a shame if young drivers do not even have the option of investing in extra training or suchlike to get a more reasonable premium when I'm sure evidence could be supplied that such measures reduce accident rates.
 
grudas said:
sex change is cheaper.
Click to expand...

And it comes with two free airbags as standard. Bonus.



Is there even any regulation on how much these guys can charge? It looks like they hide behind the cover of the fact that we all legally have to have insurance to drive, charging any amount they see fit. Do the government make any money from insurance payments?
 
I dont understand how insurance companies dont have more rules and regulations to follow given that car insurance is compulsory for vehicle ownership. They should have a ceiling on what they can charge given that its essentially a tax that is based unfairly on how others have done before you - needs sorting but wont ever happen
 
thecremeegg said:
I dont understand how insurance companies dont have more rules and regulations to follow given that car insurance is compulsory. They should have a ceiling on what they can charge or given that its essentially a tax that is based unfairly on how others have done before you - needs sorting but wont ever happen
Click to expand...

Would you rather pay for an individual assessement of your own specific risk following you passing your driving test (presumably mostly aged under 20) with a variety of cars?

I'm sure you'll allow the claims history of the cars themselves to be taken into account?

Why exactly should they have a ceiling? In practice they do, but it is based upon the value of the car you ask them to cover for you.

Like all insurance, car insurance is very 'fair' if you need it. If you don't, it is a con / rip-off / unjustified additional tax / etc etc
 
My insurance for 3rd party on a 1 litre Corsa was £1400 for the first year.

However, when it comes to renewing, I'll hopefully have a year's no-claims and I'll be 21! Can't wait =D
 
The_Abyss said:
Why exactly should they have a ceiling?
Click to expand...

I think because car insurance companies make huge profits due to the fact that the people who claim are far outnumbered by those who don't. It just seems that those profits will ever increase unless there was some government intervention to limit the profit made from what is a compulsory service. There's not many other businesses that have guaranteed customers like insurance companies do. Dentists being the other perhaps.
 
I can see why insurance companies charge so much for young males, and I don't blame them... If they lowered their insurance they'd probably make quite a massive loss.. At the end of the day your 1l might only cost >£1000 but what about that £20k car you just wrote off with it? Insurance companies need to weigh up the possible costs of insuring you into their premiums...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom