No more cheap insurance, ladies.

How sweet....

[Tod]

I guess they will be changing the rules on different prices for where you live etc as well then?

[Mr_love_monkey]

Originally Posted by Hugh

How sweet....

Even the potatoes saw that one coming - but then again they do have eyes.



But I think one of the vegetables told them that the joke was coming, because after all beanstalk.

[ZrByte]

Originally Posted by frogstamper

If the statistics prove that young women are less likely to be involved in a motor accident than young men which they apparently do, then its common sense that their premiums are going to be lower, it has nothing to do with equal rights or favouring women over men the insurance companies have obviously seen that young men are a higher risk than young women...simples really.

Of course there is the Saudi way of solving this problem.

What if a black man is more likely than a white man to have an accident? Can we charge him more? what about charging a white woman more than an asian woman?
I think there would be an outcry if we did this and I really dont see the difference between descriminating over race, gender or social standing.
Equality cuts both ways.
Typical that the insurance companies will react to this by just increasing everyones premiums but i would argue that I have paid the higher premiums since i could drive so they still wont be paying as much as i have.

They are not discriminating on the basis of sex but on statistical evidence.Are you suggesting that in future all statistical evidence has to be collected in a racially,sexuality and gender free manner?That results should be skewed in an effort not to be discriminatory?

What nonsense that would be.PC gone mad.

[ZrByte]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

They are not discriminating on the basis of sex but on statistical evidence.Are you suggesting that in future all statistical evidence has to be collected in a racially,sexuality and gender free manner?That results should be skewed in an effort not to be discriminatory?

What nonsense that would be.PC gone mad.

The only important statistic for car insurance is the odds of a driver having an accident. And not where said driver keeps their dangly bits. I really don't see how a car insurance company can count one irrelevant piece of data like gender of a driver and then not count an other equally irrelevant one like drivers race. The reason they don't count the racial data is because if they did charge someone differently based on that they would be racist or racially discriminating. How is that any different based on gender?

EDIT: And just to answer your question directly, I think they should either count them all or none of them. Because their results are equally skewed by being selective. Though sexuality would be a difficult and rather pointless one to add to that list

Originally Posted by ZrByte

The only important statistic for car insurance is the odds of a driver having an accident. And not where said driver keeps their dangly bits.

absolutely correct ,and the odds are that a woman is less likely to have an accident than a man so is priced accordingly

[ZrByte]

Originally Posted by martyh

absolutely correct ,and the odds are that a woman is less likely to have an accident than a man so is priced accordingly

Irrelevant. I notice you snipped and ignored the rest of my post. How is gender any more relevant than race?

It's irrelevant that young women have less accidents than young men, which lessens the risk of payout, therefore their payment for the insurance reflect this - how can it be irrelevant?

I have window locks, approved locks on the doors, and an alarm - this lessens the risk of a burglary compared to a house without these things, so the likelyhood of being burgled is less, so I pay lower premiums - or should I pay the same as someone who has a higher risk of burglary?

You appear to be ignoring the fact that most insurance premiums are based on actuarial statistics, which evaluate (to a reasonably high level of accuracy) the likelyhood of an incident - why should someone who is less likely to have an incident subsidise those who do?

Originally Posted by ZrByte

Irrelevant. I notice you snipped and ignored the rest of my post. How is gender any more relevant than race?

i didn't ignore it ,it has no bearing on anything
race has nothing to do with it (although i daresay that there will statistics somewhere)Insurance companies could go on forever proving that Chinese women over 30 and are left handed are safer drivers than scottish men under 50 with a ginger beard ,all they can realistically do is use data regarding age and sex regardless of race

---------- Post added at 20:34 ---------- Previous post was at 20:32 ----------

Originally Posted by ZrByte

Irrelevant. I notice you snipped and ignored the rest of my post. How is gender any more relevant than race?

how can you say it is irrelavent ,you said it

[ZrByte]

Originally Posted by martyh

i didn't ignore it ,it has no bearing on anything
race has nothing to do with it (although i daresay that there will statistics somewhere)Insurance companies could go on forever proving that Chinese women over 30 and are left handed are safer drivers than scottish men under 50 with a ginger beard ,all they can realistically do is use data regarding age and sex regardless of race

---------- Post added at 20:34 ---------- Previous post was at 20:32 ----------




how can you say it is irrelavent ,you said it

You twisted my words to try and make them say the opposite of the point you know I was trying to make, and the point you made was irrelevant.
Race wouldn't complicate it anymore than it is now, yet that's overlooked because it would be classed as discrimination. Yet somehow sex discrimination is ignored or should I say was ignored.

And Hugh, the things you list for home insurance are all things you can change, just as parking on a driveway, installing an alarm and immobiliser would for a car. Can you change your gender? Yes, lol. But should you have to to get cheaper car insurance? (actually do transgenders get cheaper or more expensive car insurance? because they shouldn't).
Would you agree to paying more for your home insurance because of your gender?
Do you really think this would even still be around now if men had cheaper premiums? The activist groups would have had that practice shut down years ago.
While we're at it lets increase male wages above female again as cost of living is clearly higher for us.
And I'm not ignoring the fact that most insurance premiums are based on statistics, quite the opposite. What I am arguing about is that they conveniently ignore statistics when it suits them. Which in my opinion leaves your point about accuracy in question.

Also I feel I should point out that it is measured based on in car fatalities rather than just drivers. So all this gender argument really proves is that there are more men travelling in cars.

On an interesting side note, My insurance came out only £5 more than my partners this year. Though hers was half mine just 2 years ago.

Males under 25 don't get higher insurance because they are male - they get higher insurance because they have more accidents.....

And 2 years ago, did you both have a clean driving licence and equal no claims bonus?

Also, looking at your age, 2 years ago, you would have been under 25, which is the upper boundary of the high risk group for males, which explains why it has dropped (unless you are stating that her's has increased to match yours).

Why is the male cost of living higher than that for women? There appear to be some straw men being built around here.....

I don't see the problem with women playing less, if they statistically make fewer and smaller claims then it's logically less risky to insure them and do so with smaller premiums. All this ruling will do to pass the savings onto the insurance company rather than the driver.

[ZrByte]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Males under 25 don't get higher insurance because they are male - they get higher insurance because they have more accidents.....

And 2 years ago, did you both have a clean driving licence and equal no claims bonus?

Also, looking at your age, 2 years ago, you would have been under 25, which is the upper boundary of the high risk group for males, which explains why it has dropped (unless you are stating that her's has increased to match yours).

Why is the male cost of living higher than that for women? There appear to be some straw men being built around here.....

Yes but the assumption is because I am male I WILL have more accidents. Ergo higher insurance because I am male. Not had one yet, although I do regret typing that as you know I will on the way to work tomorrow now.

She is 9 days older than me and we have been on the road for roughly the same amount of time (She has had her licence about 2 months longer than me). And clean licences with equal no claims. We where also going for renewal at the same time on the same car (seeing who was cheaper since we use it equally).
And to be a little pedantic I was over 25, well 25 and 5 months to be exact. Which counts

Originally Posted by ZrByte

You twisted my words to try and make them say the opposite of the point you know I was trying to make, and the point you made was irrelevant.
Race wouldn't complicate it anymore than it is now, yet that's overlooked because it would be classed as discrimination. Yet somehow sex discrimination is ignored or should I say was ignored.

And Hugh, the things you list for home insurance are all things you can change, just as parking on a driveway, installing an alarm and immobiliser would for a car. Can you change your gender? Yes, lol. But should you have to to get cheaper car insurance? (actually do transgenders get cheaper or more expensive car insurance? because they shouldn't).
Would you agree to paying more for your home insurance because of your gender?
Do you really think this would even still be around now if men had cheaper premiums? The activist groups would have had that practice shut down years ago.
While we're at it lets increase male wages above female again as cost of living is clearly higher for us.
And I'm not ignoring the fact that most insurance premiums are based on statistics, quite the opposite. What I am arguing about is that they conveniently ignore statistics when it suits them. Which in my opinion leaves your point about accuracy in question.

Also I feel I should point out that it is measured based on in car fatalities rather than just drivers. So all this gender argument really proves is that there are more men travelling in cars.

On an interesting side note, My insurance came out only £5 more than my partners this year. Though hers was half mine just 2 years ago.

no i haven't twisted your words at all ,you said

The only important statistic for car insurance is the odds of a driver having an accident

and the statistics say that men are more likely to make a claim/have an accident than women so it is priced accordingly ,this is the same the world over it has nothing to do with sexual descrimination ,under 25's are charged a lot more does that make the insurance companies ageist?.Insurance is priced on risk hence the no claims bonus ,if you don't make a claim then you get cheaper insurance because you are less of a risk