75ZT Community

I wonder what peoples thoughts are into this?

Frm December 21st (I think thats the right date) Women will no longer be able to be offered Cheap insurance on the Sole Basis of being a Woman.

Statistically young women are less likely to have accidents than young men, fair enough, but that doesn't mean every woman should get cheap insurance based solely on the above point. Some young Men never have an accident, so why should they pay for the other Young men who do etc

I have many years of no claims and surprisingly, I pay more than some of these Young Women? Why?

To give an Example, a 22 Year Old Woman on the Radio, driving a VW Polo, with 0 NCB pays only £560. Yet myself, with 8 Years no Claims, driving my 75 Diesel pays £440. So, where does the logic kick in here?

I would have 20 Years NCB, but I stopped driving my own Car for two years and used my Wifes Car on a daily basis as a named driver, causing me to lose all my NCB's .

So looking at this another way, why, with 20 Years driving experience, should I pay more than someone who doesn't have one years worth of experience? Yes, I know she pays £120 more than me, but look at it from the experience angle and NCB etc she (and many others) don't.

I personally think Insurance should be a tiered sceme. When you pass your Test, you pay £1000 for your first year, should you not cause an accident or claim against your self, then it drops £100 a year for the first five years. Staying at £400 after the 6th year. Causing an Accident or claiming bumps you back to the start at £1000.

This way People who drive sensibly and do not cause accidents, well they get rewarded fairly

Though Insurers wouldn't go for this as it removes competition etc

Simples..............

No logic Carl. I've just insured a Freelander V6 with no no-claims for not much more than my ZT with 9 years? My former car sharer paid huge sums so his lad could drive at 17 and we are talking £3 grand per year for an Astra SRI. At least he was insured and properly. Knowing insurers I'm sure they will level the premiums out. Males will not pay less at a guess???

How's the hedgehog?

Hiya mate - The Hedgehog is doing wonderful. I can pick him up now without any fuss or prickly consequence !! I can also stroke his belly now too, so it looks as though he has accepted me He eats from my hands too, though it is quiet scary as Hedgehogs have rat like teeth, very, very sharp, Tina found this out a few weeks ago lol - He bit her and it was quiet a nasty bite too

Carl, that theory doesn't work for me.

For instance you're suggesting a 17 year old with a brand new, tuned Subaru Imprezza should pay £1000, the same as another 17 year old who's got a 15 year old Rover 220Di. Doesn't make sense to me.

If girls are less risk, their premiums should be less.

Then of course there’s the basic theory that meets with total fury in Europe. All insurance has always been based entirely on
1) The profit motive
2) The assessment of the Risk Factor

In that order.

1) It’s a business, like Greengrocery, Taxi driving, or Bricklaying. The
owners of the business are not charitable philanthropists, they agree to take on
the risk that we are not prepared to take on ourselves, or are required to by law.
2) The risk is assessed by mathematicians called Actuaries. Not all of them are
Scrooges looking to rob us of our Christmas Dinner.

It so happens that females are involved in fewer accidents than males. Those accidents that are caused by female drivers invariably cost less and result in less serious personal injuries than when male drivers are involved, and there are far fewer female drives prosecuted for DUI. That adds up to a lower risk factor when computing premiums for females - hence lower premiums. Seems right to me, but as ever there are anomalies. That doesn’t mean I agree with the overall level of premiums although if it were my insurance company, and whatever is said I believe many others would secretly agree, I would charge whatever the market would stand.

The latest situation stems from the Equality industry and European law requiring there to be no discrimination on the basis of gender. Somehow the option of reducing premiums for males to equal females didn’t get on the agenda on that day.

al_dente wrote:Carl, that theory doesn't work for me.

For instance you're suggesting a 17 year old with a brand new, tuned Subaru Imprezza should pay £1000, the same as another 17 year old who's got a 15 year old Rover 220Di. Doesn't make sense to me.

If girls are less risk, their premiums should be less.

True, but if the Law worked, which it doesn't, then Young new drivers should only be allowed to drive certain CC Vehicles, in the same manner as Motorcycles. I often wondered why, you can only ride a 50cc Motorcycle at 17 but if you pass a Car test, you can, if you can afford it, drive a Lambo? Totally Illogical.

Also ref the Quote

If girls are less risk, their premiums should be less

There is a big difference between £560 and £3000 (£3000 being quite the norm for some Young Male drivers)