Another bonkers ruling from Europe?

4 Mar 2011

Quote by MidsCouple24
Equality
Men going to clubs will have to pay the same as females, this may mean a decrease in admission costs for men.
Women will have to pay the same rates as men for insurance.
Am I seeing women complaining about getting equality here ? isn't that what you fought all those years to get

:thumbup:
Can't have equality when you want it.....and ignore it when don't suit.
I'm sure more white people have accidents, as more of us drive.....should we charge white people more for insurance ? Think just a few would be up in arms about that !!
We should all start off on a level playing field....and then they should maybe reward the no claims drivers more !! This would make people realise having an accident could be a very costly affair, if they lose the no claims. Maybe make some people drive a little more carefully ?

4 Mar 2011

heres a better idea...put some speed bumps in like this !!!!

4 Mar 2011

That Mr. Cholmondley-Warner had the right idea.

4 Mar 2011

Quote by Too Hot
So there are no other ways of assessing risk available ? sex is the only yardstick ? or just the easiest

25 times as many men get convicted of dangerous driving than women. In the under 25 category male drivers are 10 times more likely to have a reported accident. This is according to an Actuary interviewed on 5 Live.
In terms of assessing risk - how else could that be broken down to make it non sexist?
This opens the door for discrimination cases on many grounds including age and could mean that a 17 year old male new driver will have the same insurance quote as a 55 year old male who has been driving for nearly forty years. It could also mean that insurance companies would not be able to vary life insurance quotes on the grounds of age or sex which is plain stupid.
You do of course have a point but there is still the chance that the 17 year old you mention is a far safer driver than the 55 year old....My point is that no-one is a statistic and being charged for the irresponsibility of your peers is unfair,the business of insurance is I have an answer ?? no not really but on the day I get my premium returned because I haven't claimed I'll be a little happier,as long as I keep paying money into a pot with no discernible benefit I'll consider the insurance companies lying thieving bastards

4 Mar 2011

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
So there are no other ways of assessing risk available ? sex is the only yardstick ? or just the easiest

25 times as many men get convicted of dangerous driving than women. In the under 25 category male drivers are 10 times more likely to have a reported accident. This is according to an Actuary interviewed on 5 Live.
In terms of assessing risk - how else could that be broken down to make it non sexist?
This opens the door for discrimination cases on many grounds including age and could mean that a 17 year old male new driver will have the same insurance quote as a 55 year old male who has been driving for nearly forty years. It could also mean that insurance companies would not be able to vary life insurance quotes on the grounds of age or sex which is plain stupid.
You do of course have a point but there is still the chance that the 17 year old you mention is a far safer driver than the 55 year old....My point is that no-one is a statistic and being charged for the irresponsibility of your peers is unfair,the business of insurance is I have an answer ?? no not really but on the day I get my premium returned because I haven't claimed I'll be a little happier,as long as I keep paying money into a pot with no discernible benefit I'll consider the insurance companies lying thieving bastards
not to mention the people who make fraudulent claims eh? wink

4 Mar 2011

Quote by GnV
So there are no other ways of assessing risk available ? sex is the only yardstick ? or just the easiest

25 times as many men get convicted of dangerous driving than women. In the under 25 category male drivers are 10 times more likely to have a reported accident. This is according to an Actuary interviewed on 5 Live.
In terms of assessing risk - how else could that be broken down to make it non sexist?
This opens the door for discrimination cases on many grounds including age and could mean that a 17 year old male new driver will have the same insurance quote as a 55 year old male who has been driving for nearly forty years. It could also mean that insurance companies would not be able to vary life insurance quotes on the grounds of age or sex which is plain stupid.
You do of course have a point but there is still the chance that the 17 year old you mention is a far safer driver than the 55 year old....My point is that no-one is a statistic and being charged for the irresponsibility of your peers is unfair,the business of insurance is I have an answer ?? no not really but on the day I get my premium returned because I haven't claimed I'll be a little happier,as long as I keep paying money into a pot with no discernible benefit I'll consider the insurance companies lying thieving bastards
not to mention the people who make fraudulent claims eh? wink

Surely the good decent honest decent good hard-working decent honest folk of England would do no such thing??....I blame the welsh

4 Mar 2011

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
So there are no other ways of assessing risk available ? sex is the only yardstick ? or just the easiest

25 times as many men get convicted of dangerous driving than women. In the under 25 category male drivers are 10 times more likely to have a reported accident. This is according to an Actuary interviewed on 5 Live.
In terms of assessing risk - how else could that be broken down to make it non sexist?
This opens the door for discrimination cases on many grounds including age and could mean that a 17 year old male new driver will have the same insurance quote as a 55 year old male who has been driving for nearly forty years. It could also mean that insurance companies would not be able to vary life insurance quotes on the grounds of age or sex which is plain stupid.
You do of course have a point but there is still the chance that the 17 year old you mention is a far safer driver than the 55 year old....My point is that no-one is a statistic and being charged for the irresponsibility of your peers is unfair,the business of insurance is I have an answer ?? no not really but on the day I get my premium returned because I haven't claimed I'll be a little happier,as long as I keep paying money into a pot with no discernible benefit I'll consider the insurance companies lying thieving bastards
not to mention the people who make fraudulent claims eh? wink

Surely the good decent honest decent good hard-working decent honest folk of England would do no such thing??....I blame the welsh
the good decent honest decent hard working decent folk of England probably don't bother with insurance so you could well be right, they can't do such a thing 'cos they don't have it in the first place. innocent

The Welsh just claim language difficulties and claim race discrimination instead as its more lucrative. :grin:

4 Mar 2011

Quote by GnV
So there are no other ways of assessing risk available ? sex is the only yardstick ? or just the easiest

25 times as many men get convicted of dangerous driving than women. In the under 25 category male drivers are 10 times more likely to have a reported accident. This is according to an Actuary interviewed on 5 Live.
In terms of assessing risk - how else could that be broken down to make it non sexist?
This opens the door for discrimination cases on many grounds including age and could mean that a 17 year old male new driver will have the same insurance quote as a 55 year old male who has been driving for nearly forty years. It could also mean that insurance companies would not be able to vary life insurance quotes on the grounds of age or sex which is plain stupid.
You do of course have a point but there is still the chance that the 17 year old you mention is a far safer driver than the 55 year old....My point is that no-one is a statistic and being charged for the irresponsibility of your peers is unfair,the business of insurance is I have an answer ?? no not really but on the day I get my premium returned because I haven't claimed I'll be a little happier,as long as I keep paying money into a pot with no discernible benefit I'll consider the insurance companies lying thieving bastards
not to mention the people who make fraudulent claims eh? wink

Surely the good decent honest decent good hard-working decent honest folk of England would do no such thing??....I blame the welsh
the good decent honest decent hard working decent folk of England probably don't bother with insurance so you could well be right, they can't do such a thing 'cos they don't have it in the first place. innocent

The Welsh just claim language difficulties and claim race discrimination instead as its more lucrative. :grin:
do the welsh have cars then ??? i thought that was why the seven bridge only charged one way bolt

4 Mar 2011

Quote by deancannock
Equality
Men going to clubs will have to pay the same as females, this may mean a decrease in admission costs for men.
Women will have to pay the same rates as men for insurance.
Am I seeing women complaining about getting equality here ? isn't that what you fought all those years to get

:thumbup:
Can't have equality when you want it.....and ignore it when don't suit.
I'm sure more white people have accidents, as more of us drive.....should we charge white people more for insurance ? Think just a few would be up in arms about that !!
We should all start off on a level playing field....and then they should maybe reward the no claims drivers more !! This would make people realise having an accident could be a very costly affair, if they lose the no claims. Maybe make some people drive a little more carefully ?
In the 17-19 age groups, 37% of males hold a full driving licence, compared to 35% females yet the casualty rate per 100,000 licences is 106.1 males to 42.3 females. In the 20-24 age groups, the figures are 67% and 62% licences held and 49.5 to 24.3 casualties. Where does equality enter into the equation?
Let's put it another way Dean. If 2 new prospective customers wanted to do business with you and after credit checking them, you found one to be considerably more a credit risk than the other, would you offer them both the same terms or would you build an element of risk into the terms offered to the more risky one?

4 Mar 2011

but max.....if two companies started on same day and wanted to do business..their credit rateing would be exactly the same !!
Its only after tradeing for a period of time, that you get a real true credit rateing.
I guess I am saying the same....all start off at same point...and then depending on how good or bad your insurance risk ratein becomes.....the higher or lower your premiums.
I do understand where insurance companies are coming from, but I do feel they are punishing alot of good male drivers, who have done little or nothing wrong.

4 Mar 2011

Quote by deancannock
but max.....if two companies started on same day and wanted to do business..their credit rateing would be exactly the same !!
Its only after tradeing for a period of time, that you get a real true credit rateing.
I guess I am saying the same....all start off at same point...and then depending on how good or bad your insurance risk ratein becomes.....the higher or lower your premiums.
I do understand where insurance companies are coming from, but I do feel they are punishing alot of good male drivers, who have done little or nothing wrong.

I said 2 new prospective customers to you, I didn't say they were 2 new businesses.

4 Mar 2011

but if they were companies that had already traded, they would indeed have a track record, that I could analize and decide the risk of tradeing with them.
However I thought the whole idea if this legislation was to ensure that male and females , new drivers, were insured the same. At the moment a male same age, with same car, I believe would be more to insure. Not based on his driving skills or lack of them as the case may be.
As I say....I do see where the insurance companies are coming from, and in their shoes would probably do the same, but still don't make it fair !!

4 Mar 2011

Quote by deancannock
but if they were companies that had already traded, they would indeed have a track record, that I could analize and decide the risk of tradeing with them.
However I thought the whole idea if this legislation was to ensure that male and females , new drivers, were insured the same. At the moment a male same age, with same car, I believe would be more to insure. Not based on his driving skills or lack of them as the case may be.
As I say....I do see where the insurance companies are coming from, and in their shoes would probably do the same, but still don't make it fair !!

That's exactly my point, you would make an informed decision based on your perceived element of risk and that's exactly what the insurers do. The way the risk is calculated may not be fair to all male drivers but as in most things in life, the majority end up paying for the minority.

4 Mar 2011

The fatality per driver figures quoted take no account of the amount of driving done by the people or the time of day. Both of which have a massive impact on accidents which gender does not.
Therefore whilst insurance companies have every right to charge high mileage drivers and those who drive at dangerous times more they have no right to assume driving habits based on gender.

4 Mar 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
The fatality per driver figures quoted take no account of the amount of driving done by the people or the time of day. Both of which have a massive impact on accidents which gender does not.
Therefore whilst insurance companies have every right to charge high mileage drivers and those who drive at dangerous times more they have no right to assume driving habits based on gender.

Do you have any statistics that may indicate that there may be significant differences in the driving habits of males and females in the age groups quoted or is it just conjecture on your part?

5 Mar 2011

Yers the scientific journal article quoted earlier and associated materials explore the matter in great depth.

5 Mar 2011

Quote by Max777
Let's put it another way Dean. If 2 new prospective customers wanted to do business with you and after credit checking them, you found one to be considerably more a credit risk than the other, would you offer them both the same terms or would you build an element of risk into the terms offered to the more risky one?

about the best answer to this we have heard on here Max and certainly the easiset to understand.
insurance companies have to be able to work out the risk and they cannot do that most of the time with just an indevidual and have to take it as a persentage of a group of people.
we have noticed that some people will argu about the price of a cup of tee of here.
:thumbup:

5 Mar 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
Yers the scientific journal article quoted earlier and associated materials explore the matter in great depth.

Ben, the scientific journal to which you refer used data from 1990 and data from the US at that and I doubt if it has any relevance to UK driving habits in 2011. Driving habits will have changed enormously over the past 20 years, not least the number of young women drivers on the road. As starlightcouple have said , it's impossible for insurers to assess individual drivers and the statistics clearly show that young male drivers are up to twice the risk of female drivers, when Expressed as a group.
Insurers should therefore be able to take these risk factors into account but now can not due to this bonkers ruling from Europe.

5 Mar 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
Yers the scientific journal article quoted earlier and associated materials explore the matter in great depth.

Ben, the scientific journal to which you refer used data from 1990 and data from the US at that and I doubt if it has any relevance to UK driving habits in 2011. Driving habits will have changed enormously over the past 20 years, not least the number of young women drivers on the road. As starlightcouple have said , it's impossible for insurers to assess individual drivers and the statistics clearly show that young male drivers are up to twice the risk of female drivers, when Expressed as a group.
Insurers should therefore be able to take these risk factors into account but now can not due to this bonkers ruling from Europe.

5 Mar 2011

will the extra money raised max go towards giving males cheeper insuranse?
We would presume that there will be now millions more pounds the insuranse companies will now get or will it just disapeer into a big black insuranse hole?

5 Mar 2011

Quote by starlightcouple
will the extra money raised max go towards giving males cheeper insuranse?
We would presume that there will be now millions more pounds the insuranse companies will now get or will it just disapeer into a big black insuranse hole?

I very much doubt it, it will just mean that a lot of young female drivers will face much higher premiums. To be fair to insurers, they did not want this ruling but I can't see anyone benefitting from it.

5 Mar 2011

Quote by Max777
will the extra money raised max go towards giving males cheeper insuranse?
We would presume that there will be now millions more pounds the insuranse companies will now get or will it just disapeer into a big black insuranse hole?

I very much doubt it, it will just mean that a lot of young female drivers will face much higher premiums. To be fair to insurers, they did not want this ruling but I can't see anyone benefitting from it.
we think the insuranse companies will.

5 Mar 2011

Quote by starlightcouple
will the extra money raised max go towards giving males cheeper insuranse?
We would presume that there will be now millions more pounds the insuranse companies will now get or will it just disapeer into a big black insuranse hole?

I very much doubt it, it will just mean that a lot of young female drivers will face much higher premiums. To be fair to insurers, they did not want this ruling but I can't see anyone benefitting from it.
we think the insuranse companies will.
yes I agree, I meant I couldn't see any of the insured groups of drivers benefitting.

5 Mar 2011

The most worrying aspect of the ruling is the can of worms it has opened up in respect of risk profiling taking into account age, race sex. There are so many risk factors that are unique to certain age groups, races and whether you are male or female that this ruling has the potential to turn the insurance business on its head and it will mean that Joe Average will end up paying more because high risk people can't be discriminated against.
In particular, certain cancers are predominent with particular gender and race - the logical step of this ruling is that this would not be able to be taken into account.
Life insurance, term insurance, motor insurance - it could all end up costing much more particuylarly if up to now you have been considered low risk.

5 Mar 2011

Quote by Too Hot
The most worrying aspect of the ruling is the can of worms it has opened up in respect of risk profiling taking into account age, race sex. There are so many risk factors that are unique to certain age groups, races and whether you are male or female that this ruling has the potential to turn the insurance business on its head and it will mean that Joe Average will end up paying more because high risk people can't be discriminated against.
In particular, certain cancers are predominent with particular gender and race - the logical step of this ruling is that this would not be able to be taken into account.
Life insurance, term insurance, motor insurance - it could all end up costing much more particuylarly if up to now you have been considered low risk.

:thumbup:

5 Mar 2011

Quote by Ben_welshminx
The fatality per driver figures quoted take no account of the amount of driving done by the people or the time of day. Both of which have a massive impact on accidents which gender does not.
Therefore whilst insurance companies have every right to charge high mileage drivers and those who drive at dangerous times more they have no right to assume driving habits based on gender.

i doubt very much that large insurance companies (profitable business)would get their facts wrong regards to whom are more insurable than others !!
maybe you should try your hand at insurance ?

5 Mar 2011

Quote by Max777
Yers the scientific journal article quoted earlier and associated materials explore the matter in great depth.

Ben, the scientific journal to which you refer used data from 1990 and data from the US at that and I doubt if it has any relevance to UK driving habits in 2011. Driving habits will have changed enormously over the past 20 years, not least the number of young women drivers on the road. As starlightcouple have said , it's impossible for insurers to assess individual drivers and the statistics clearly show that young male drivers are up to twice the risk of female drivers, when Expressed as a group.
Insurers should therefore be able to take these risk factors into account but now can not due to this bonkers ruling from Europe.
Just idle curiosity you understand but what vintage are the figures you keep telling us about ? where do they come from ? quid as they say pro quo

5 Mar 2011

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
Yers the scientific journal article quoted earlier and associated materials explore the matter in great depth.

Ben, the scientific journal to which you refer used data from 1990 and data from the US at that and I doubt if it has any relevance to UK driving habits in 2011. Driving habits will have changed enormously over the past 20 years, not least the number of young women drivers on the road. As starlightcouple have said , it's impossible for insurers to assess individual drivers and the statistics clearly show that young male drivers are up to twice the risk of female drivers, when Expressed as a group.
Insurers should therefore be able to take these risk factors into account but now can not due to this bonkers ruling from Europe.
Just idle curiosity you understand but what vintage are the figures you keep telling us about ? where do they come from ? quid as they say pro quo
look at the link I provided and you will see they are from 2009, or is your curiosity too idle for that?

6 Mar 2011

Quote by Max777
Yers the scientific journal article quoted earlier and associated materials explore the matter in great depth.

Ben, the scientific journal to which you refer used data from 1990 and data from the US at that and I doubt if it has any relevance to UK driving habits in 2011. Driving habits will have changed enormously over the past 20 years, not least the number of young women drivers on the road. As starlightcouple have said , it's impossible for insurers to assess individual drivers and the statistics clearly show that young male drivers are up to twice the risk of female drivers, when Expressed as a group.
Insurers should therefore be able to take these risk factors into account but now can not due to this bonkers ruling from Europe.
Just idle curiosity you understand but what vintage are the figures you keep telling us about ? where do they come from ? quid as they say pro quo
look at the link I provided and you will see they are from 2009, or is your curiosity too idle for that?
Yes

6 Mar 2011

probably a very good reason why some peeple make themselves look very silly on here.
as we have said already that some people can argue about the price of a cup of tee on here.