[Donette93]

..... If due to EU rulings the insurance companies making cheaper car insurance for women was deemed to be discriminatory.... then surely making car insurance prices sky high for 17-25 year olds is also discriminatory? I know statistically young drivers are more likely to have accidents but so are male drivers yet only the gender issue is considered discriminatory

Futhermore in regards to the UK now changing the law so insurance prices cant differ based on gender then why didnt they just opt to lower the prices males pay rather than raise the price for women -___-

I just passed my test at 18 years old and as i was searching through insurance websites and through quotes i realized there is no hope and I should give up on trying to get a car

[audi_turbo]

Yeah I was thinking this the other day.. I agree with making the prices the same for men and women and I guess that also the age thing can be also slightly discriminatory, after all there are obviously plenty of young safe drivers out there and obviously plenty of dangerous adult drivers.

But insurance in general is the biggest rip off. You pay thousands into the system for years and when you make a claim they charge you even more..

[G8D]

The EU doesn't really focus on age discrimination.

They're much more race/nationality/sex based when it comes to discrimination.


Don't get your hopes up for a reduction enforced by the EU

[Donette93]

(Original post by G8D)
The EU doesn't really focus on age discrimination.

They're much more race/nationality/sex based when it comes to discrimination.


Don't get your hopes up for a reduction enforced by the EU

This is what truly annoys me ... when i heard about them making a fuss over gender discrimination as if age discrimination was non-existant ... now its even worse for me to try get insurance thanks to the EU and their stupidness the only hope of slightly lower insurance due to me being female is gopne.

Its as if i passed for no reason!

[Gjaykay]

Although I completely agree with you, people believe that with age comes experience and that adults are less likely to get into accidents. Except - and I don't have any figures on me at this given moment - it seems obvious to me that adults get into more accidents - Insurance Companies are just trying to cash in on the whole 'boy racer' thingy.

Edit: *sigh* I hate it when people wont bother discussing actual points of relevance, just hide behind a neg button

[sammy-lou]

Don't get me wrong, I completely agree with you here, but maybe it's more to do with discriminating between those with driving experience and those without. As young, newly qualified drivers have less experience than older people who have been driving for years, that may be why their premiums are so ridiculously high in comparison?

[JO53PHS]

(Original post by Donette93)
Futhermore in regards to the UK now changing the law so insurance prices cant differ based on gender then why didnt they just opt to lower the prices males pay rather than raise the price for women -___-

Insurance companies don't just insure people for fun... they do actually have to make money. A reduction in insurance premiums for male drivers would represent a significant loss of revenue.

[StuAndMma]

I think the idea is that we will all see both the negatives and the positives of the way insurance works with age. Yeah, it sucks while we're young, but everyone will have lower insurance as they get older.

Conversely, not everyone will experience have both male and female cover - age is a shared experience, whereas you're stuck with your gender, which is why I think the age side of thing is still allowed.

[DolallyDucky]

Of course they wouldn't just lower it for men, where the profit in that? I haven't even bothered learning to drive as there's no way I can afford insurance

[ROG.]

A new driver at age say 19 will pay more than a new driver at say age 30

The reason is easy - the older a person is the more mature they are in their thinking - that is how the insurers see it

In general that is correct - I did say - in general

[Donette93]

(Original post by sammy-lou)
Don't get me wrong, I completely agree with you here, but maybe it's more to do with discriminating between those with driving experience and those without. As young, newly qualified drivers have less experience than older people who have been driving for years, that may be why their premiums are so ridiculously high in comparison?

but its not based on experience ? because a first time driver who was 40 years old trying to get insurance will still find it a lot cheaper than an 18 year old who is a first time driver.... in my opinion this is clearly discrimination and an issue that the EU needs to look at seeing as they're so keen to interfere in regards to gender discrimination

[FXX]

The system is flawed but there isn't a better one yet. At least the way it is now encourages safer driving - if you pay through the arse for the right to drive, you aren't going to be a prat on the roads.

[sammy-lou]

(Original post by Donette93)
but its not based on experience ? because a first time driver who was 40 years old trying to get insurance will still find it a lot cheaper than an 18 year old who is a first time driver.... in my opinion this is clearly discrimination and an issue that the EU needs to look at seeing as they're so keen to interfere in regards to gender discrimination

That is true. Yeah, it is discriminatory. I guess in a way its because, with age, you have the excuse that everyone has been 18 once if they are 40 now, whereas you cant say the same for gender or ethnicity. I dunno. It's still stupid - there's no real logic behind, it for the reasons you gave.

[Devon]

I love how older drivers pay less because they're "safer" (I'm talking about Saga, etc. here not 30s, 40s) when in fact your reaction times decrease with age. BTW, the link is based on US stats, so danger when turning left would be turning right, here.

[CurlyBen]

(Original post by Donette93)
but its not based on experience ? because a first time driver who was 40 years old trying to get insurance will still find it a lot cheaper than an 18 year old who is a first time driver.... in my opinion this is clearly discrimination and an issue that the EU needs to look at seeing as they're so keen to interfere in regards to gender discrimination

A driver with no experience will pay a lot for insurance, end of story. An older inexperienced driver may pay a little less, but they will still be paying a lot more than another driver the same age that's been driving (without crashing or racking up points) since they were 18.
Secondly, why shouldn't insurance companies discriminate against those who cost them the most money? Do you also object to their discrimination against those with driving convictions?

(Original post by Gjaykay)
Although I completely agree with you, people believe that with age comes experience and that adults are less likely to get into accidents. Except - and I don't have any figures on me at this given moment - it seems obvious to me that adults get into more accidents - Insurance Companies are just trying to cash in on the whole 'boy racer' thingy.

Eh? That's some impressive stuff you're smoking.

[Donette93]

(Original post by CurlyBen)
A driver with no experience will pay a lot for insurance, end of story. An older inexperienced driver may pay a little less, but they will still be paying a lot more than another driver the same age that's been driving (without crashing or racking up points) since they were 18.
Secondly, why shouldn't insurance companies discriminate against those who cost them the most money? Do you also object to their discrimination against those with driving convictions?


Eh? That's some impressive stuff you're smoking.

My point was that if they are changing the law due to discrimination based on gender being unfair then why cant they amend the law in regards to age discrimination.

I dont quite see why ur comparing it to people with driving convictions tbh.

[CurlyBen]

(Original post by Donette93)
My point was that if they are changing the law due to discrimination based on gender being unfair then why cant they amend the law in regards to age discrimination.

I dont quite see why ur comparing it to people with driving convictions tbh.

I'd have thought it was pretty obvious. Insurance companies know the profile of those most likely to cause a large claim, and hence increase their premiums. Both young people and those with driving convictions are far more likely to cause a large claim, hence both pay substantially more for insurance.

[Donette93]

(Original post by CurlyBen)
I'd have thought it was pretty obvious. Insurance companies know the profile of those most likely to cause a large claim, and hence increase their premiums. Both young people and those with driving convictions are far more likely to cause a large claim, hence both pay substantially more for insurance.

but ur going off point... those with driving convictions have given insurance companies reason to be wary of them subjectively.... whereas in regards to young drivers all the insurance companies look at is statistics objectively

so again i dont know why your comparing the two

[Point!]

The fact the EU are looking at any kind of 'discrimination' here is absolutely ridiculous.

Insurance companies draw their prices from complex models that are put together (usually by actuaries) using shedloads of data. These models are some of the most true-to-life models used in any industry today.

Whether the EU likes it or not, there is a difference between the amount you'd expect a man to claim and the amount you'd expect a woman to claim. No matter what a bureaucrat in Brussels says about discrimination, that fact will always hold true.

Why can't we just accept for once that people should pay the fair market value for the risk which is being underwritten for them?

[CurlyBen]

(Original post by Donette93)
but ur going off point... those with driving convictions have given insurance companies reason to be wary of them subjectively.... whereas in regards to young drivers all the insurance companies look at is statistics objectively

so again i dont know why your comparing the two

I think you're confusing the meaning of the words there. Subjective means subject to opinion, objective is independent of opinion, i.e. fact. Statistics objectively show both groups of drivers to be high risk, hence the premiums are high. Anyway, no point getting bogged down in it, it was only a throwaway comment. The point you cannot escape is that young drivers are likely to cost insurers a lot more money than older drivers and so they will pay a lot more for insurance. Since you're so anti-discrimination, do you think there should be a single, flat rate of insurance for everyone, regardless of the car they drive, how old they are, driving experience etc.? If you're a halfway decent driver that won't be in your interest in the long term, and probably not in the short term either...