Women's lower insurance premiums ruled unfair (From Basingstoke Gazette)

Nice local story, my opinion about time too, were always hearing women bleating about sexism and men have had to put up with it for years with your man flu jibes. Now all we need is for age discrimination to be banned.

Why should women enjoy a lower premium compared to men ? Lets face it most of them cant park a car to save there lives, let alone the risk they take doing there lippy and make up whilst driving along. Its plain for all to see.

About flipping time, women are horrendous drivers. the amount of times I have had a woman pull out in front of me is amazing just last month there was a woman on the A345 near Figheldean at night time sitting in the road waiting to turn right on to a tank track as I got closer she stopped indicating pulled forward then suddenly reversed backwards then swerved into the other side of the road... this all on a 60 limit with double white lines.. I had to brake so hard the built in safety system on the car came into force 4 ways turned on and steering wheel pulled away from me (safer position) I was beeping my horn and she looked at me as if to say “what’s wrong” ...

stmarysmush wrote:
Why should women enjoy a lower premium compared to men ? Lets face it most of them cant park a car to save there lives, let alone the risk they take doing there lippy and make up whilst driving along. Its plain for all to see.

Because statistics have shown time and time again we're better safer drivers :D wonder where the term 'boy racer' comes from.......

Having not had an accident in 24 years I can say that - (touch wood).

Insurance companies assess everything on 'risk' - it is dubious that this is labelled as discrimination....

As for the man flu comment... but suffice to say that nature itself has made women the more 'hardy' of the sexes, we survive more at birth and age longer - all down to biology. ;P

mac1989 wrote:
About flipping time, women are horrendous drivers. the amount of times I have had a woman pull out in front of me is amazing just last month there was a woman on the A345 near Figheldean at night time sitting in the road waiting to turn right on to a tank track as I got closer she stopped indicating pulled forward then suddenly reversed backwards then swerved into the other side of the road... this all on a 60 limit with double white lines.. I had to brake so hard the built in safety system on the car came into force 4 ways turned on and steering wheel pulled away from me (safer position) I was beeping my horn and she looked at me as if to say “what’s wrong” ...

There wouldn't be enough column room for me to list all the male '****' drivers I've come across.... and some women too. However, most of us are sensible to take this as a tongue in cheek banter rather than condemn everyone 'female' or 'male'. Human error when operating any machine is always going to happen.

One thing I will say however, how many women have you seen in the Echo lately being accused of road rage attacks. People need to calm down and not treat their cars like some sort of penile extension ;)!

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

stmarysmush wrote: Why should women enjoy a lower premium compared to men ? Lets face it most of them cant park a car to save there lives, let alone the risk they take doing there lippy and make up whilst driving along. Its plain for all to see.

Because statistics have shown time and time again we're better safer drivers :D wonder where the term 'boy racer' comes from....... Having not had an accident in 24 years I can say that - (touch wood). Insurance companies assess everything on 'risk' - it is dubious that this is labelled as discrimination.... As for the man flu comment... but suffice to say that nature itself has made women the more 'hardy' of the sexes, we survive more at birth and age longer - all down to biology. ;P

another sexist comment us men have to deal with and ageist for that matter... boy racer :-/

I don't know what you're all on about, my wife has been driving for years and has never had an accident...........m
ind you, she has seen hundreds in her rear view mirror!!!!

So basically the only way it will affect me is that I can no longer get cheap car insurance by having my girlfriend as a named driver. All the geniuses at the EU have done is substantially increase the cost of my car insurance, well done...

StEmmosfire wrote:

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

stmarysmush wrote: Why should women enjoy a lower premium compared to men ? Lets face it most of them cant park a car to save there lives, let alone the risk they take doing there lippy and make up whilst driving along. Its plain for all to see.

Because statistics have shown time and time again we're better safer drivers :D wonder where the term 'boy racer' comes from....... Having not had an accident in 24 years I can say that - (touch wood). Insurance companies assess everything on 'risk' - it is dubious that this is labelled as discrimination.... As for the man flu comment... but suffice to say that nature itself has made women the more 'hardy' of the sexes, we survive more at birth and age longer - all down to biology. ;P

another sexist comment us men have to deal with and ageist for that matter... boy racer :-/

Oh bless you poor downtrodden thing, we're all feeling so sorry for you (NOT!)..........

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

StEmmosfire wrote:

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

stmarysmush wrote: Why should women enjoy a lower premium compared to men ? Lets face it most of them cant park a car to save there lives, let alone the risk they take doing there lippy and make up whilst driving along. Its plain for all to see.

Because statistics have shown time and time again we're better safer drivers :D wonder where the term 'boy racer' comes from....... Having not had an accident in 24 years I can say that - (touch wood). Insurance companies assess everything on 'risk' - it is dubious that this is labelled as discrimination.... As for the man flu comment... but suffice to say that nature itself has made women the more 'hardy' of the sexes, we survive more at birth and age longer - all down to biology. ;P

another sexist comment us men have to deal with and ageist for that matter... boy racer :-/

Oh bless you poor downtrodden thing, we're all feeling so sorry for you (NOT!)..........

Chauvinist.

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

stmarysmush wrote: Why should women enjoy a lower premium compared to men ? Lets face it most of them cant park a car to save there lives, let alone the risk they take doing there lippy and make up whilst driving along. Its plain for all to see.

Because statistics have shown time and time again we're better safer drivers :D wonder where the term 'boy racer' comes from....... Having not had an accident in 24 years I can say that - (touch wood). Insurance companies assess everything on 'risk' - it is dubious that this is labelled as discrimination.... As for the man flu comment... but suffice to say that nature itself has made women the more 'hardy' of the sexes, we survive more at birth and age longer - all down to biology. ;P

I guess stats. would show women have less accidents mainly due to the fact at anyone time theres more men on the road than women. Agreed ? Should be based on the number of men and women on the road and the ratio of accidents. Im sure male drivers would be well ontop of such a report.

si1989si wrote:
So basically the only way it will affect me is that I can no longer get cheap car insurance by having my girlfriend as a named driver. All the geniuses at the EU have done is substantially increase the cost of my car insurance, well done...

Ah - you mean the illegal practice of "fronting", which will render your policy invalid?

sfby wrote:

si1989si wrote:
So basically the only way it will affect me is that I can no longer get cheap car insurance by having my girlfriend as a named driver. All the geniuses at the EU have done is substantially increase the cost of my car insurance, well done...

Ah - you mean the illegal practice of "fronting", which will render your policy invalid?

Proving your actually doing "Fronting" is nearly impossible to prove, Why should a young male driver pay nearly £2500-3000 for insurance when he can get another person to be the main driver for £1000 and to add himself for £500 that's a saving of £1000-1500 and that's a lot for a young person.... insurance companies wrongly label all young drivers as Boy Racers and rob people of thousands it's legalised theft

Not often I get annoyed by EU rules and European Court of Justice decisions.
.
Insurance premium rates are determined by risk. The risk can be determined statistically by claims experience. In respect of motor insurance the main risk factors are sex, age, experience, vehicle type and claims experience.
.
With a huge abundance of data, calculating the correct rate for each individual is an equitable method of distributing costs within society.
.
This decision will mean females will now be subsidising every male policyholder.
.
At a time when computer processing of data has made the job of determining the risk in ever more precise detail this is a retrograde move.
.
Insurance premiums (all types) should reflect the actual risks and not politically inspired decisions.

stmarysmush wrote:

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

stmarysmush wrote: Why should women enjoy a lower premium compared to men ? Lets face it most of them cant park a car to save there lives, let alone the risk they take doing there lippy and make up whilst driving along. Its plain for all to see.

Because statistics have shown time and time again we're better safer drivers :D wonder where the term 'boy racer' comes from....... Having not had an accident in 24 years I can say that - (touch wood). Insurance companies assess everything on 'risk' - it is dubious that this is labelled as discrimination.... As for the man flu comment... but suffice to say that nature itself has made women the more 'hardy' of the sexes, we survive more at birth and age longer - all down to biology. ;P

I guess stats. would show women have less accidents mainly due to the fact at anyone time theres more men on the road than women. Agreed ? Should be based on the number of men and women on the road and the ratio of accidents. Im sure male drivers would be well ontop of such a report.

.. you show above your COMPLETE ignorance of statistics and how they are complied.
.. not to mention your misplaced male chauvinism.

freefinker wrote:

stmarysmush wrote:

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

stmarysmush wrote: Why should women enjoy a lower premium compared to men ? Lets face it most of them cant park a car to save there lives, let alone the risk they take doing there lippy and make up whilst driving along. Its plain for all to see.

Because statistics have shown time and time again we're better safer drivers :D wonder where the term 'boy racer' comes from....... Having not had an accident in 24 years I can say that - (touch wood). Insurance companies assess everything on 'risk' - it is dubious that this is labelled as discrimination.... As for the man flu comment... but suffice to say that nature itself has made women the more 'hardy' of the sexes, we survive more at birth and age longer - all down to biology. ;P

I guess stats. would show women have less accidents mainly due to the fact at anyone time theres more men on the road than women. Agreed ? Should be based on the number of men and women on the road and the ratio of accidents. Im sure male drivers would be well ontop of such a report.

.. you show above your COMPLETE ignorance of statistics and how they are complied. .. not to mention your misplaced male chauvinism.

The dangers of statistics... statically you are more likely to commit a crime if your are of a certain ethnicity... but a lot of people cant handle that?

Fact. Women have a similar number of accidents to men however, for goodness sake it isn't hard to work out that the average bloke drives 20,000 miles per year, the average woman ... two! Mile for mile men are several times less likely to have an accident than women. Watch the motorways, the vast majority of drivers are men, women stick to the local shop, school or supermarket run, where they are likely to reverse into another car. Men tend to have accidents that make the headlines because they crash at speed (motorways, A roads) as opposed to women who have shunts at less than 5 mph whilst they are trying to park somewhere where if they weren't lazy they could have walked in the first place.

It's about time! It's not often that I agree with rulings made by the ECJ, but they should be commended for this decision.

mac1989 wrote:

sfby wrote:

si1989si wrote: So basically the only way it will affect me is that I can no longer get cheap car insurance by having my girlfriend as a named driver. All the geniuses at the EU have done is substantially increase the cost of my car insurance, well done...

Ah - you mean the illegal practice of "fronting", which will render your policy invalid?

Proving your actually doing "Fronting" is nearly impossible to prove, Why should a young male driver pay nearly £2500-3000 for insurance when he can get another person to be the main driver for £1000 and to add himself for £500 that's a saving of £1000-1500 and that's a lot for a young person.... insurance companies wrongly label all young drivers as Boy Racers and rob people of thousands it's legalised theft

Not saying it isn't lucrative - just pointing out that it's fraud & you can end up with no cover if it's discovered. Bit of a problem if you've just made someone (for example) quadraplegic (sp?). Bye bye house!

And about time too! Women fought for equality ... well now they have it in the car insurance market as well. It is about time that women realised they cannot be treated differently to men.

And as far as statistics are concerned, number crunching can always be used to try and prove points in either direction. As for my statistics, in more than 30 years of driving I have been involved in two accidents - both of which were undeniably proved to be caused by the female driver of the other vehicle.

On one occasion the women was too busy checking her dogs instead of the road, and the other was busy trying to make a phone call on a handheld mobile while approaching a roundabout.

So if anyone wants statistics, then I would say that 100% of women have caused accidents that have directly affected me.

Now that's probably going to get some backlash I imagine .....

In my experience, there are few average lady drivers. The good ones are excellent and the 'below average' are frightening.

For those thinking that this ruling is going to bring down insurance premiums for blokes - think again. They will come up with some excuse why the premiums for females have to go up, and why it remains the same for blokes.

If you are not allowed to discriminate based on gender then a logical next step is say ageism is wrong and you should not discriminate based on the age of the driver, or even further, disability such as blindness!!
where will it stop

How can women be expected to drive safely when they don't even understand the offside rule!

freefinker wrote:
Not often I get annoyed by EU rules and European Court of Justice decisions.
.
Insurance premium rates are determined by risk. The risk can be determined statistically by claims experience. In respect of motor insurance the main risk factors are sex, age, experience, vehicle type and claims experience.
.
With a huge abundance of data, calculating the correct rate for each individual is an equitable method of distributing costs within society.
.
This decision will mean females will now be subsidising every male policyholder.
.
At a time when computer processing of data has made the job of determining the risk in ever more precise detail this is a retrograde move.
.
Insurance premiums (all types) should reflect the actual risks and not politically inspired decisions.

As usual the most analytic and sensible post on here FT! :)

Agreed, it should assess risk as that is how the whole industry works. And people are kidding themselves if they think insurance will go down for young men for example. I say that having a 20 year old son myself who has just paid out a fortune on insurance after saving for that and a car for 3 years. I do say to him it's unfair that the high 'claim rate' of young men and fatalitie etc is unfair perhap but not discrimination per se.

What is a worse scam is that for monthly repayment the inurance company wanted to charge him an extra £500 pa. in interest payments! Daylight robbery!

BS you don't really believe that women do two miles a year do you and we all trundle along to the local shop in our car and nothing else ? LOL

sfby wrote:

si1989si wrote:
So basically the only way it will affect me is that I can no longer get cheap car insurance by having my girlfriend as a named driver. All the geniuses at the EU have done is substantially increase the cost of my car insurance, well done...

Ah - you mean the illegal practice of "fronting", which will render your policy invalid?

No the legal practice of naming my girlfriend as a second driver so that we don't need 2 cars. Problem?

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

freefinker wrote:
Not often I get annoyed by EU rules and European Court of Justice decisions.
.
Insurance premium rates are determined by risk. The risk can be determined statistically by claims experience. In respect of motor insurance the main risk factors are sex, age, experience, vehicle type and claims experience.
.
With a huge abundance of data, calculating the correct rate for each individual is an equitable method of distributing costs within society.
.
This decision will mean females will now be subsidising every male policyholder.
.
At a time when computer processing of data has made the job of determining the risk in ever more precise detail this is a retrograde move.
.
Insurance premiums (all types) should reflect the actual risks and not politically inspired decisions.

As usual the most analytic and sensible post on here FT! :)

Agreed, it should assess risk as that is how the whole industry works. And people are kidding themselves if they think insurance will go down for young men for example. I say that having a 20 year old son myself who has just paid out a fortune on insurance after saving for that and a car for 3 years. I do say to him it's unfair that the high 'claim rate' of young men and fatalitie etc is unfair perhap but not discrimination per se.

What is a worse scam is that for monthly repayment the inurance company wanted to charge him an extra £500 pa. in interest payments! Daylight robbery!

BS you don't really believe that women do two miles a year do you and we all trundle along to the local shop in our car and nothing else ? LOL

A slight exaggeration on my behalf FMG2! But it the 'average' bloke, whatever one of them is, certainly drives greater distances per year than the average woman, so although the stats show that men have the same number of accidents as women do, the stats do not factor in the greater distances driven by men. Agreed that young men are more likely to crash than most, but ALL men's insurance policies are partly higher as they have been subsidising women's discounted policies, and unfairly so, for many years. Once again the motorist gets stung, this time it's the women, usually it's everyone, thank godness petrol, car tax and the costs of MOT's has not taken such a sexist approach as car insurers have.

If you want cheap Insurance then don't look for it in this country, You can get half the price quote from over seas insurers than you can here and get the same cover.
UK car insurance is way to high, this is because you are paying for those people who drive round in fast elite sport cars who have protected no claims bonus and end up in crashes, you are also paying out for the big bonuses that is paid to the bosses just like the banks.
If enough people started to look over seas for there insurances, then the prices would drop in a very big way, because they would have to stop giving the bosses there big bonuses, remember this is a capitalist world, who keep saying its a global economy then people should use it to there advantages by shopping aboard for there insurance and other things, show them what a global economy really means, after its what the capitalist want so give it to them.

Women drivers should pay equal to men. They don't pay less in road tax for being female, they don't pay less in fuel duty for being female and are still exposed to the same risk factors as men on the roads as men. So this ruling is more than fair.

letting woman drive car like letting monkey fly aeroplane.

Southy,
Do you drive a car?
Do you have insurance?
If so, Is that insurance provided by an overseas insurance company?
Please tell us the name of that company so that we can all get our insurance at half price.
.
The major problem in what you are saying is that Insurance Companies, wherever they are located, provide insurance for their own market first and foremost. If you have vehicle insurance provided with a British Company they they expect you to do most of your driving in the UK. Cover is nowadays included for reasonable use within the EU but anything else will attract a higher premium, including long term use in other EU countries.
Likewise if you insure your car in, say, France or Germany for example then using it exclusively in the UK is regarded as long-term overseas use for which additional premiums will probably be payable, negating any savings.
This is the reason that many Eastern Europeans in the UK do day trips, with their car, to France, sometimes exchanging them or trading them in - The cost of the trips is usually less than the difference in Insurance premium and it keeps it more or less legal.

bill
yes
yes
yes
google, it there are loads out there, the one australia that i pick on i was happy about the price, because it brought my insurance down below the £150 mark again, after my insurance quoted a price rise of over £200 for this year, and i was straight on the phone to them, asking why the big hike in insurance, it was the girl on the other end that put the idea towards me.
the insurance that i got now is the same cover has it got before, plus there is no extra for driving in other countrys which is perfect for me all i got to do is inform them before hand that will be driving out side the uk, and a simple e-mail will do that.
you need to inform them that you are a uk resident, with a uk licence, with a uk registration car, and you be driving mainly in the uk.
its the same with mortgages, you can get them over seas to at a much better rate. but i knew that over 30 years ago, when japan mortgages was 1/3 the cost of uk mortgages.
try it google it and see what you can come up with on quotes for insurance in other country's for the uk market.

.. and, southy, at I've informed you in the past the VAST majority of ALL insurance premiums actually go to pay claims and running costs (staff, premises, etc). A very, very tiny proportion of every premium you pay is diverted to shareholders and executive bonuses. That’s why mutual insurers, like CIS and NFU, have similar premiums to “capitalist” insurers.
.
Your “fast elite sport cars” argument is just another of your illogical red herrings. Perhaps you would like to inform us of their total number compared to the approximately 25 million vehicles on UK roads. I think you will find it’s such a minuscule percentage that if they were all “written-off” in one year it would make less than £1.00 difference to all our renewal premiums.
.
Yet again you try to blame the rich for all our problems by concocting stupid and un-resourced “data” - but then no regular on this site would expect you to take any notice of facts when they get in the way of your rhetoric.

only red herrings is from you ff, talking the girl on the other end of the phone to my old car insurers, her boss pick up a £15k bonus for last year, while they made cut backs in staff, and he is not high up on the ranks has bosses go.

and what is the cost of a single elite sports car 500k to over a million, big difference between a normal car say of 30k.
the rhetoric is people like you who wants to keep an unfair system in control.

southy wrote:
only red herrings is from you ff, talking the girl on the other end of the phone to my old car insurers, her boss pick up a £15k bonus for last year, while they made cut backs in staff, and he is not high up on the ranks has bosses go.

.. pure hearsay.
.
If such bonuses and dividends are the cause of high premium rates then why are the mutual insurers not considerably cheaper?

southy wrote:
If you want cheap Insurance then don't look for it in this country, You can get half the price quote from over seas insurers than you can here and get the same cover.
UK car insurance is way to high, this is because you are paying for those people who drive round in fast elite sport cars who have protected no claims bonus and end up in crashes, you are also paying out for the big bonuses that is paid to the bosses just like the banks.
If enough people started to look over seas for there insurances, then the prices would drop in a very big way, because they would have to stop giving the bosses there big bonuses, remember this is a capitalist world, who keep saying its a global economy then people should use it to there advantages by shopping aboard for there insurance and other things, show them what a global economy really means, after its what the capitalist want so give it to them.

"fast elite sport cars ". Don't forget that you're subsidising those of us that own pre 1973 vehicles because we pay no road tax.

southy wrote:
and what is the cost of a single elite sports car 500k to over a million, big difference between a normal car say of 30k.
the rhetoric is people like you who wants to keep an unfair system in control.

... and how many are there in this price bracket? I notice you didn't answer my question. Par for the course. Again, you are just showing your inability to deal with statistics in a rational way.
.
"unfair system in control" - what are you talking about? My political philosophy is much nearer to yours than you think. It’s just I don’t think it advantageous to keep making things up and to continue to indulge in repeating wholly inaccurate statistics long after others have pointed out how far from the truth they are.

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:
only red herrings is from you ff, talking the girl on the other end of the phone to my old car insurers, her boss pick up a £15k bonus for last year, while they made cut backs in staff, and he is not high up on the ranks has bosses go.

.. pure hearsay.
.
If such bonuses and dividends are the cause of high premium rates then why are the mutual insurers not considerably cheaper?

its not hear say at all, all those sort of high bonus is though out financial set up more so here in the uk and the usa, and the people who pay for those bonus are the people who take out insurance, all your trying to do is put off people from checking up for them self,s to see if it be cheaper for them to, and to take there business out of the uk.
this global economy works both ways

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:
If you want cheap Insurance then don't look for it in this country, You can get half the price quote from over seas insurers than you can here and get the same cover.
UK car insurance is way to high, this is because you are paying for those people who drive round in fast elite sport cars who have protected no claims bonus and end up in crashes, you are also paying out for the big bonuses that is paid to the bosses just like the banks.
If enough people started to look over seas for there insurances, then the prices would drop in a very big way, because they would have to stop giving the bosses there big bonuses, remember this is a capitalist world, who keep saying its a global economy then people should use it to there advantages by shopping aboard for there insurance and other things, show them what a global economy really means, after its what the capitalist want so give it to them.

"fast elite sport cars ". Don't forget that you're subsidising those of us that own pre 1973 vehicles because we pay no road tax.

you only subsidise that with in the road tax system, not much you can do about that apart from getting a pre 1973 vehicle, but you end up paying more for fuel because they do less miles to the gallon, cars have come a long way for mpg now, even my car that,s a 92 reg will do 46 mpg and is very close to being 2 ton in weight.

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:
only red herrings is from you ff, talking the girl on the other end of the phone to my old car insurers, her boss pick up a £15k bonus for last year, while they made cut backs in staff, and he is not high up on the ranks has bosses go.

.. pure hearsay.
.
If such bonuses and dividends are the cause of high premium rates then why are the mutual insurers not considerably cheaper?

For legal reasons ALL phone conversations to UK Insurance companies begin with the message that calls are recorded for 'training purposes'. Obviously this girl is no longer interested in keeping her job because she's revealing confidential information or she is a bit stupid in the way she talks to perfect strangers while being monitored. The more likely explanation is that the tale is completely fabricated as most from this poster are.

Torchie1 wrote:

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:
only red herrings is from you ff, talking the girl on the other end of the phone to my old car insurers, her boss pick up a £15k bonus for last year, while they made cut backs in staff, and he is not high up on the ranks has bosses go.

.. pure hearsay.
.
If such bonuses and dividends are the cause of high premium rates then why are the mutual insurers not considerably cheaper?

For legal reasons ALL phone conversations to UK Insurance companies begin with the message that calls are recorded for 'training purposes'. Obviously this girl is no longer interested in keeping her job because she's revealing confidential information or she is a bit stupid in the way she talks to perfect strangers while being monitored. The more likely explanation is that the tale is completely fabricated as most from this poster are.

no not all calls to insurance company,s are recorded. you wrong there.

southy wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:
If you want cheap Insurance then don't look for it in this country, You can get half the price quote from over seas insurers than you can here and get the same cover.
UK car insurance is way to high, this is because you are paying for those people who drive round in fast elite sport cars who have protected no claims bonus and end up in crashes, you are also paying out for the big bonuses that is paid to the bosses just like the banks.
If enough people started to look over seas for there insurances, then the prices would drop in a very big way, because they would have to stop giving the bosses there big bonuses, remember this is a capitalist world, who keep saying its a global economy then people should use it to there advantages by shopping aboard for there insurance and other things, show them what a global economy really means, after its what the capitalist want so give it to them.

"fast elite sport cars ". Don't forget that you're subsidising those of us that own pre 1973 vehicles because we pay no road tax.

you only subsidise that with in the road tax system, not much you can do about that apart from getting a pre 1973 vehicle, but you end up paying more for fuel because they do less miles to the gallon, cars have come a long way for mpg now, even my car that,s a 92 reg will do 46 mpg and is very close to being 2 ton in weight.

When you buy a car from that era it's for pleasure, not driving to Lidls for the weekly shop. My own vehicles don't even do a thousand miles a year and knowing that one had a four and a half litre and the other had a six litre engine, I didn't expect fuel economy of more than single figures. Luckily my company 'sponsors' ninety per cent of the costs to help me out and they benefit from the publicity at major motoring events which is a deductible cost.

That,s a choice that you make on what you drive and when.

AD07881 wrote:
letting woman drive car like letting monkey fly aeroplane.

Hi Borat!

On Topic -
Insurance insures against risk, rather like a bet;
As a bet is based on form so the risk is calculated on the basis of any number of relevant factors;
The factors are those which have on past evidence been shown as providing variables;
Insurers have over the years noted that certain aspects of males and females affect the payments that they make against claims;
Accordingly they have calculated mathematically that the risk varies with gender combined with age.
The Insurers have calculated the premiums (your stake money) on the basis of a purely mathematical model.
This judgement means that they have to recalculate that mathematical model ignoring one of the known and established factors.
What will be the next factor which they will be forced to ignore? Age? Disability? Previous driving record?
.
Southy's Topic -
Southy:
Name the Company that your Broker recommended so that we can all save money, albeit at higher risk to ourselves.
I personally would rather deal with an organisation that came under the Financial Services Authority and the British Financial Ombudsman Service - It is an extra level of Insurance against the insurers which is sometimes necessary.

southy wrote:

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:
only red herrings is from you ff, talking the girl on the other end of the phone to my old car insurers, her boss pick up a £15k bonus for last year, while they made cut backs in staff, and he is not high up on the ranks has bosses go.

.. pure hearsay.
.
If such bonuses and dividends are the cause of high premium rates then why are the mutual insurers not considerably cheaper?

its not hear say at all, all those sort of high bonus is though out financial set up more so here in the uk and the usa, and the people who pay for those bonus are the people who take out insurance, all your trying to do is put off people from checking up for them self,s to see if it be cheaper for them to, and to take there business out of the uk.
this global economy works both ways

.. answer my question - "why are the mutual insurers not considerably cheaper?"

This is a funny story, I really hope Harriet Harman is fully in support of such an act of equality- although I'm sure her premiums will increase after she drove off failing to report an accident.

X Old Bill wrote:
On Topic -
Insurance insures against risk, rather like a bet;
As a bet is based on form so the risk is calculated on the basis of any number of relevant factors;
The factors are those which have on past evidence been shown as providing variables;
Insurers have over the years noted that certain aspects of males and females affect the payments that they make against claims;
Accordingly they have calculated mathematically that the risk varies with gender combined with age.
The Insurers have calculated the premiums (your stake money) on the basis of a purely mathematical model.
This judgement means that they have to recalculate that mathematical model ignoring one of the known and established factors.
What will be the next factor which they will be forced to ignore? Age? Disability? Previous driving record?
.
Southy's Topic -
Southy:
Name the Company that your Broker recommended so that we can all save money, albeit at higher risk to ourselves.
I personally would rather deal with an organisation that came under the Financial Services Authority and the British Financial Ombudsman Service - It is an extra level of Insurance against the insurers which is sometimes necessary.

most countries have a same sort of thing has we do, they have what we would call a ombudsman and there own financial authority, just that they call it by other names, told you to google it, they are out there loads of them, your driving conditions will be different from mine, and there,s no restrictions to whom an insurer can insure, or who you want to insure you, you are free to pick any one around the world to insure you, and any one around the world is allowed to insure you.
My old insurance company never recommended any company, she just steered in to the direction to look, which i am doing to you now. to google it.

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:
only red herrings is from you ff, talking the girl on the other end of the phone to my old car insurers, her boss pick up a £15k bonus for last year, while they made cut backs in staff, and he is not high up on the ranks has bosses go.

.. pure hearsay.
.
If such bonuses and dividends are the cause of high premium rates then why are the mutual insurers not considerably cheaper?

its not hear say at all, all those sort of high bonus is though out financial set up more so here in the uk and the usa, and the people who pay for those bonus are the people who take out insurance, all your trying to do is put off people from checking up for them self,s to see if it be cheaper for them to, and to take there business out of the uk.
this global economy works both ways

.. answer my question - "why are the mutual insurers not considerably cheaper?"

well go and find out why. it could be there,s not enough policy holders, to meet the min target in finances required by law, so its spread out between between the policy holders.
mutual insurers is very expensive if there not many, but gets cheaper the more there is. another words they are to small to make it considerably cheaper.

every one should check out insurance company's around the world, they can save a considerably amount of money. you do not have to stick to company,s in the UK.

old bill watch the doc called "inside job" its on the internet to watch or read the book "the 2 trillion dollar meltdown" it tells you how the financial world do gamble with bonds ect.

freefinker wrote:
Not often I get annoyed by EU rules and European Court of Justice decisions. . Insurance premium rates are determined by risk. The risk can be determined statistically by claims experience. In respect of motor insurance the main risk factors are sex, age, experience, vehicle type and claims experience. . With a huge abundance of data, calculating the correct rate for each individual is an equitable method of distributing costs within society. . This decision will mean females will now be subsidising every male policyholder. . At a time when computer processing of data has made the job of determining the risk in ever more precise detail this is a retrograde move. . Insurance premiums (all types) should reflect the actual risks and not politically inspired decisions.

Just shows what a nonsense the EU courts are, that they don't even seem to have the knowledge within them that the WHOLE BASIS OF RATING INSURANCE IS BASED ON RISK (NOT A PERSON'S SEX!) which, as said above, is based on statistics of occurrences of an insured event - ie fact: for whatever reason, men have more accidents than women.
THIS IS THE FIRST THING YOU LEARN WHEN YOU STUDY INSURANCE - which hardly anyone does these days as even the majority of people at the top of insurance companies don't have a clue about the technical aspects of insurance!
It's nothing to do with sexism as women have also received lesser pension (annuity) rates than men due to (statistically-prove
d) living longer.
If the huge insurance companies across Europe don't sort this one out (with all their combined available funds for the legal costs) and get the EU to reverse the decision, then that will be because there's more profit in it for them to let the EU believe they were discriminating based on a customer's sex, and now price policies such that women will be paying way over the odds for the risk they represent to insurance companies!
The next thing the EU will be doing, no doubt, is to say life insurance premiums can't be rated according to age because it's ageist! (And nothing to do with the fact that, when you get to age 70, you're more likely to die than when you're age 18).
When things like this happen, I begin to think the whole world is going mad!

Whilst most of you are arguing whether men or women are statistically more likely to have accidents you are missing a major point. The ECJ made its judgement based on the interpretation that equality provisions set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Lisbon Treaty must now apply.
That's the treaty we were promised a referendum on that we never got. Once again unelected European judges deciding what happens in the UK with no prior discussion in UK courts or the UK parliament. There will be more. You are now all citizens of the EU first and the UK second - whether you like it or not.

What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? Of course, with car insurance you're guilty until proven innocent, although even that is not the case. If you're a man with 20 years no claims you will end up paying more than a woman with 20 years no claims. Basically, just like insurance companies stereotype under 25s as ALL being dangerous drivers, they sterotype men as ALL being more dangerous drivers than women, if you keep other variables such as age and years of no claims the same. Why do insurance companies not follow "innocent until proven guilty"? Simple, they wouldn't be able to rape as much money from motorists.

I'm a young male driver, and I have done about 85k miles since I turned 17 and not had a single accident. I'm still "put in a box" by insurance companies though, just because I'm young and male.

southy wrote:
If you want cheap Insurance then don't look for it in this country, You can get half the price quote from over seas insurers than you can here and get the same cover. UK car insurance is way to high, this is because you are paying for those people who drive round in fast elite sport cars who have protected no claims bonus and end up in crashes, you are also paying out for the big bonuses that is paid to the bosses just like the banks. If enough people started to look over seas for there insurances, then the prices would drop in a very big way, because they would have to stop giving the bosses there big bonuses, remember this is a capitalist world, who keep saying its a global economy then people should use it to there advantages by shopping aboard for there insurance and other things, show them what a global economy really means, after its what the capitalist want so give it to them.

Hi Southy, *I'm not picking on you* but I have just been searching Google and cannot find any foreign insurance companies at all. I'm interested in what you say but can't seem to get my search terms right :/ Please give me a clue as to what I should be typing in the box! I've tried overseas insurance company etc... but I keep getting links to UK insurers who will give me European cover- doing my nut in!