Insurance companies forced to make men/women policy prices equal

http://money.uk.msn.com/money-guides/insurance/articles.aspx?cp-documentid=156195925

Did anyone hear this debate on the radio yesterday?

If this goes through, simply the price of all policies will be going up so I can't see the point...

 

I assume that womens polices will just be made more expensive to match mens policies rather than vice versa.

 

all insurance is calculated via statistics, male/female is just one of those.

If you worked on that rule, we should all be paying top dollar so as to not discriminate against those that live in crappy area's full of car crime

 

Statistically they cause more accidents than we do. They just never seem to update their statistics on stuff like that. Women are far more dodgy behind the wheel in this day and age, especially *****es in chelsea tractors.

 

stupid meddling euro zone, if statistics prove women are safer drivers then they should pay less, simple, same as if statistics prove young male drivers are the worse they should pay more, which they do

 

Young males aren't THAT bad anymore. It just so happens they probably get nicked for no insurance now because they can't affordi insurance. So they end up with points. Young males aged 18-24 are priced off the road.

Luckily I found myself a solution, avoid cars that my age group tend to crash and I'll get better prices. Porsche 944 insured for just under a grand? Yes please.

 

Mental.

Next it'll be illegal to give up your seat on the bus, in case it's actually a fat bird

 

Hey, nothing wrong with fat birds.

http://www.clubgti.com/forum/showpost.php?p=2041725&postcount=11

 

On one hand I quite enjoy it when these ridiculous PC anti-discrimination laws backfire in the faces of the lefty idiots that conceived them, so in principle I aplaud the two Belgian guys for bringing this case to court in the first place. The simple fact is that men and women are different and should be treated as such, in a job that requires physical strength women should be payed less than men, that isn't discrimination, it's common sense. Equally if women are a lower insurance risk than men then they should have lower premiums. You can't have your cake and eat it though & this court case goes some of the way to proving that.

 

When I see a woman driving a car, clearly with no idea of the width of the car, I have to question what I am seeing versus the notion of being a lower insurance risk.

Or making the most atrocious attempt at parking, like I saw outside my front window last week, boyfriend willingly directing, thinking he'd sooner be driving the thing. Spatial awareness, come in please.

This is not uncommon, I am sure we can all agree.

Plainly that information and that lower risk insurance notion do not correspond.

Hail the revolution: we're half way there now.

 

I think the insurance companies' angle is that women make fewer claims which we must accept as factual.

I don't want to get into the who are better drivers debate.

I still wholeheartedly approve of the principles behind this court case as it ridicules the idea that hte genders should be treated equally, a concept dreamed up by some sensible shoe wearing types no doubt.

Hopefully more of these PC diversity/equality policies will get the same treatment soon and will be proved to be the nonesense that they truly are. Once they start to be used against those that er supposed to benefit they may start to be less strenuously enforced and maybe one day coomon sense will come back into vogue

 

Hail the revolution.

I generally find travelling in a car with a young girl a generally scary experience. Maybe they make less claims etc because they get daddy to fix their car and act all scared to the people they hit? Theres definitely something wrong in their statistics I think.

Although young guys do generally make their crashes in a more spectacular and expensive style.

 

Forgot to add "even if our own experiences may indicate the contrary"

 

Well let me keep banging the drum: it has never made any sense.

 

Also its dumb things, like adding your missus to a policy because you have the no claims, years of experience and driven nearly everthing on wheels.
All because they want 2k premium so she can sit In a jam the way into town.
Adding the wife to the policy made it 250 comp!!
Absolute no brainer, but when a claim goes through its me that's the statistic.

 

women do less miles and hence report less total accidents. however accidents per mile are higher IIRC

if anyone has young kids in the car then insurance should go up 10x, there's nothing like a fight breaking out and puke down your neck to put you off.

a range of driving tests should sort that out, class c license=restrited to 30mph, class A super difficult to pass= unlimited speed etc

 

iirc woman have more low speed crashes and prangs than men, who tend to crash at speed. Hence the settlement of the claims made by women are generally lower, so lower premiums.

That said, insurance will keep going up because dumb f**ks keep claiming for injuries they haven't sustained. i.e. claiming for whiplash 3 months after a low speed "fender bender" without a doctors examination through one of these b*****d no win - no fee "companies"

 

worse still is the possibility of them giving discounts to drivers who have a newly developed "BLACK BOX" style data logger fitted. so the can monitor your driving style, although i bet it can`t tell your 1 coat of paint away from the car in front at 70mph in the rain

we have these at work, i`ve been in the office a few times to explain the emergency starts and high g turns

 

Jesus, any links to this? Our driving style freedom has just officially had time called on it

 

If substantial discounts are being offered for these then it will probably be the way to go, espeically on daily drivers.

The road isn't the place to be driving in such a way that an insurance company will see fit to raise your premium.