Young Driver insurance, problem solved?

pickles_17

right, im in school, but was thinkin bout how young male and female drivers are discriminated against, so i was thinkin, just thinkin, of setting uo an insurance company, where, a person from the company, goes out to the persons car or vice versa, if i is a "done up car" or anytying they get charged normally, but if the car was say a fiesta(98) or anything like that, then i would insure them for 1-2 k depending!

would it work?

Why wouldnt it, i say?

Browney7

Do you want to save money on Your Car Insurance???

Aaawwww Yesss!;)

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

I wouldn't think so, there's a reason why younger people pay more for insurance. If you take on people and charge less than most companies then you are taking on a huge risk. I doubt it will work. If you integrated some sort of special requirement, like an additional test like what Hibernian do, or ask for said drivers to have a restrictor inserted in their engines then it may work. You need to think long and hard about it though It's not impossible, just very difficult I would think. Travelling to each of your clients to inspect their vehicle? not going to work... Charging someone extra because their car is "done up" is just plain stupid. Base it on engine size. A lot of boy racers, sorry, car enthusiasts (ROFL) are actually careful drivers.

The larger companies should be able to afford it, but they don't lower the prices. There should be more competition in the market.

Blackjack

pickles_17 wrote: »

right, im in school, but was thinkin bout how young male and female drivers are discriminated against, so i was thinkin, just thinkin, of setting uo an insurance company, where, a person from the company, goes out to the persons car or vice versa, if i is a "done up car" or anytying they get charged normally, but if the car was say a fiesta(98) or anything like that, then i would insure them for 1-2 k depending!

would it work?

No.

pickles_17 wrote: »

Why wouldnt it, i say?

Risk profiles.

pickles_17

no i was thinkin would it pay off financially, with all the crashes and that?!

ShooterSF

The idea I had before is that you offer insurance at a low rate to starting drivers but require a large deposit. If at the end of the year you have no accidents the deposit is returned and the following years deposit is lower. If not depending on the accident some or none of the deposit is returned. Therefore you pay according to your ability as a driver not people of the same age.

ejmaztec

By the time they've finished paying all of the vehicle inspectors, and added the cost to the premiums, we'd all be paying more, whether our cars are modified or not.

pickles_17

ok, so a no no then!

javaboy

ShooterSF wrote: »

The idea I had before is that you offer insurance at a low rate to starting drivers but require a large deposit. If at the end of the year you have no accidents the deposit is returned and the following years deposit is lower. If not depending on the accident some or none of the deposit is returned. Therefore you pay according to your ability as a driver not people of the same age.

The problem there is that you won't keep enough reserves to pay the claims that do arise unless you're talking about taking absolutely huge deposits but then most young people couldn't afford them anyway.

Tom65

ShooterSF wrote: »

The idea I had before is that you offer insurance at a low rate to starting drivers but require a large deposit. If at the end of the year you have no accidents the deposit is returned and the following years deposit is lower. If not depending on the accident some or none of the deposit is returned. Therefore you pay according to your ability as a driver not people of the same age.

That's an interesting idea. I'm 21 and having to pay an absolute arseload of cash for insurance just because some gob****es my age and gender think they're brilliant by speeding.

After I got my license, to add my name to my Mum's car when down €50 to €475 (for the year). My sister (who hadn't taken a lesson) paid €16. That is ridiculous.

SV

Ah yeah sure I mean..only the cars that are 'done up' drive like twats and cause accidents.

terrible stupid idea.

Sherifu

So after you visit, I do up my car.

Need to write that down somewhere.

Mark200

I'm 18 and I've had my licence for almost four months now, and had my provisional for a year before that. I'm definitely not one of those boy-racer/car-enthusiasts. I don't even drive it that much. When I'm in college during the week I get the train, and I might drive my car maybe once on the weekend. If I'm on holidays for college though I'd drive it a good bit more.

For that, I'm currently paying 2k a year for my insurance. Twice the value of my car. It's a bit ridiculous. And even if I did ever crash into someone, I'd pay for the damage out of my own pocket anyway to avoid continuously huge premiums.

pickles_17

so is it a good idea, yes or no?

wish i set up a poll

javaboy

pickles_17 wrote: »

so is it a good idea, yes or no?

wish i set up a poll

Let me know what options you want and I'll add one.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

I think the overall idea is bad, you need more ideas. You can't say what you said and expect people to agree with you. You haven't thought about it much.

Are you going to employ people, do you know what's involved, are you going to take insurance exams etc etc?

Have you taken into account costs of these ideas? Did you think this idea up on your 15 break? It seems so.

Mark200

I think the general concept of it is alright. A few things though:

1) How would you define what a "done up car" is?

2) How would you control the fact that they could easily bring the car in, show it to you, then on their way home drop it off in a garage and get it "done up" then.

3) Most people who have cars like that are just the ones that can afford to. It doesn't mean that all the people who dream of having a car so they can race their friends up and down the road can afford to paint it blue and decorate it etc.

mehfesto2

I think if you have the chip your car should come down a lot more than it does.

FlutterinBantam

pickles_17 wrote: »

right, im in school, but was thinkin bout how young male and female drivers are discriminated against, so i was thinkin, just thinkin, of setting uo an insurance company, where, a person from the company, goes out to the persons car or vice versa, if i is a "done up car" or anytying they get charged normally, but if the car was say a fiesta(98) or anything like that, then i would insure them for 1-2 k depending!

would it work?

Why wouldnt it, i say?

Because they are notbeing discriminated against pal. That's why.

They are a much greater risk. Is is 40-50 yr olds find themselves wrapped round trees every weekend??

NO!!

Go figure.

javaboy

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Because they are notbeing discriminated against pal. That's why.

They are a much greater risk. Is is 40-50 yr olds find themselves wrapped round trees every weekend??

NO!!

Go figure.

When it comes to insurance, I am treated differently to people of other ages based solely on my gender and age.

How do you define discrimination?

FlutterinBantam

Being treated differently for NO FRIKKEN GOOD REASON

javaboy

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Being treated differently for NO FRIKKEN GOOD REASON

And what is the good reason in this case?

FlutterinBantam

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Because they are notbeing discriminated against pal. That's why.

They are a much greater risk. Is is 40-50 yr olds find themselves wrapped round trees every weekend??

NO!!

Go figure.

javaboy wrote: »

And what is the good reason in this case?

This new responsibility is slowin' ya down JB.

Take a time out.;)

javaboy

I'm well aware that young drivers are statistically more likely to be in accident. And I know that it would make insurance phenomenally expensive and impractical if every driver was individually assessed before being quoted a premium. I know that statistics and generalisations are unfortunately a necessary evil.

But that doesn't mean it's not discrimination. It clearly is. I have done nothing to merit being charged more.

iPlop

Mark200 wrote: »

I'm 18 and I've had my licence for almost four months now, and had my provisional for a year before that. I'm definitely not one of those boy-racer/car-enthusiasts. I don't even drive it that much. When I'm in college during the week I get the train, and I might drive my car maybe once on the weekend. If I'm on holidays for college though I'd drive it a good bit more.

For that, I'm currently paying 2k a year for my insurance. Twice the value of my car. It's a bit ridiculous. And even if I did ever crash into someone, I'd pay for the damage out of my own pocket anyway to avoid continuously huge premiums.

When I started driving 11 years ago I was paying 4,000 pounds(5,078.95 euros) for a car that cost me 1000 pounds.I think insurance has come down a huge amount for young people ,Im not saying it's not expensive but it's far cheaper now than when I started driving:cool:

seanybiker

pickles_17 wrote: »

so i was thinkin, just thinkin, of setting uo an insurance company,

Was thinking about setting up an insurance company meself and just insuring meself for the first few years, sure feck it, must be simple. lol

FlutterinBantam

javaboy wrote: »

I'm well aware that young drivers are statistically more likely to be in accident. And I know that it would make insurance phenomenally expensive and impractical if every driver was individually assessed before being quoted a premium. I know that statistics and generalisations are unfortunately a necessary evil.

But that doesn't mean it's not discrimination. It clearly is. I have done nothing to merit being charged more.

Insurance is all about risk and how risk is actuarialy assessed.

That's why older people have to pay more for health insurance.

Assessing everyone for an insurance is obviously not practical,so we have the method we have.

Now if you found out that you were being charged way more than your comparable age group, then you would have a case.

In the meantime you have to pay up for the gimps who drive around like madmen, and who, statistically are in the younger age group.

It's the way the world turns man.

javaboy

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Insurance is all about risk and how risk is actuarialy assessed.

That's why older people have to pay more for health insurance.

Assessing everyone for an insurance is obviously not practical,so we have the method we have.

Now if you found out that you were being charged way more than your comparable age group, then you would have a case.

In the meantime you have to pay up for the gimps who drive around like madmen, and who, statistically are in the younger age group.

It's the way the world turns man.

Em yeah I think I made it pretty clear I understand all that. But it's still discrimination.

Mark200

seanybiker wrote: »

Was thinking about setting up an insurance company meself and just insuring meself for the first few years, sure feck it, must be simple. lol

That's actually a genius idea.

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Insurance is all about risk and how risk is actuarialy assessed.

That's why older people have to pay more for health insurance.

Assessing everyone for an insurance is obviously not practical,so we have the method we have.

Now if you found out that you were being charged way more than your comparable age group, then you would have a case.

In the meantime you have to pay up for the gimps who drive around like madmen, and who, statistically are in the younger age group.

It's the way the world turns man.

No one is arguing that younger drivers shouldn't be charged more than older drivers. But it's discrimination because it's generalizing everyone in a certain group as worse drivers, when actually only some of them are really.

It's like saying all Muslims should be subject to tighter restrictions when going into the US. It doesn't mean all, or the majority, of Muslims are believed to be bad people. But statistically most people who want to blow up America are Muslims.
It's still discrimination.

jhegarty

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

That's why older people have to pay more for health insurance.
.

No , they don't.

FlutterinBantam

Not to me you didn't .

It's called loading, not dicremination.

jhegarty

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Not to me you didn't .

It's called loading, not dicremination.

Try to charge travelers more because of what other travelers do , and see what it's called.

FlutterinBantam

Mark200 wrote: »

That's actually a genius idea.



No one is arguing that younger drivers shouldn't be charged more than older drivers. But it's discrimination because it's generalizing everyone in a certain group as worse drivers, when actually only some of them are really.

It's like saying all Muslims should be subject to tighter restrictions when going into the US. It doesn't mean all, or the majority, of Muslims are believed to be bad people. But statistically most people who want to blow up America are Muslims.
It's still discrimination.

No it's not.

We are talking INSURANCE here, not blowing up the US.

Keep the topic on topic my friend.

javaboy

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Not to me you didn't .

Fair enough. I reread my post and it doesn't look to me like the rantings of someone who doesn't "get" insurance. I said I understand that using statistics and generalisations are a necessary evil. I acknowledged that individual assessments are impractical.

It's called loading, not dicremination.

It doesn't matter what they call it. The only reason I am charged more than javagirl is because I am javaboy. The only reason I am charged more than javaman is because I am javaboy.

I'm not suggesting that anything can or should be done about it. There's not really a practical solution available. But to argue that it's not discrimination is nonsense.

FlutterinBantam

jhegarty wrote: »

Try to charge travelers more because of what other travelers do , and see what it's called.

Don't hear too much stories of travellers having insurance problems:rolleyes:

FlutterinBantam

javaboy wrote: »

Fair enough. I reread my post and it doesn't look to me like the rantings of someone who doesn't "get" insurance. I said I understand that using statistics and generalisations are a necessary evil. I acknowledged that individual assessments are impractical.



It doesn't matter what they call it. The only reason I am charged more than javagirl is because I am javaboy. The only reason I am charged more than javaman is because I am javaboy.

I'm not suggesting that anything can or should be done about it. There's not really a practical solution available. But to argue that it's not discrimination is nonsense.

Do not agree,it's done for a REASON.

javaboy

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Do not agree,it's done for a REASON.

I know it's done for a reason. I've acknowledged that more than once now. But that doesn't mean it's not discrimination.

I am being made to pay for the sins of other people in my age group and gender. If we were talking about anything else other than insurance, you'd call it discrimination. But with insurance, it's "loading".

pickles_17

a poll, just is this a good idea, yes or no

FlutterinBantam

javaboy wrote: »

I know it's done for a reason. I've acknowledged that more than once now. But that doesn't mean it's not discrimination.

I am being made to pay for the sins of other people in my age group and gender. If we were talking about anything else other than insurance, you'd call it discrimination. But with insurance, it's "loading".

If I turned up at a bus stop with my twin brother aged 28 covered in shíte and smelling like a cess pit and he is clean as a whistle.

The bus driver allows him on and refuses me. Is that discrimination??

Mark200

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

No it's not.

We are talking INSURANCE here, not blowing up the US.

Keep the topic on topic my friend.

I was using a hypothetical comparison to explain to you what discrimination is. But you obviously didn't understand.

Treating someone differently because of their race or gender or age is discrimination. It doesn't matter what kind of statistics you have for treating them differently.

Mark200

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

If I turned up at a bus stop with my twin brother aged 28 covered in shíte and smelling like a cess pit and he is clean as a whistle.

The bus driver allows him on and refuses me. Is that discrimination??

That's distinguishing one person from another. It's when you define everyone by a generalisation of a group they're in, then it is discrimination.

sunnyside

OP it's a bad idea.

Mark200 wrote: »

And even if I did ever crash into someone, I'd pay for the damage out of my own pocket anyway to avoid continuously huge premiums.

Are you sure you could afford to pay for the damage? Do you know how much it costs to keep someome in the National Rehab Centre in Dundrum? Not all accidents involve small dents.

javaboy

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

If I turned up at a bus stop with my twin brother aged 28 covered in shíte and smelling like a cess pit and he is clean as a whistle.

The bus driver allows him on and refuses me. Is that discrimination??

Is that a serious question?

pickles_17

I think the general concept of it is alright. A few things though:

1) How would you define what a "done up car" is?

2) How would you control the fact that they could easily bring the car in, show it to you, then on their way home drop it off in a garage and get it "done up" then.

3) Most people who have cars like that are just the ones that can afford to. It doesn't mean that all the people who dream of having a car so they can race their friends up and down the road can afford to paint it blue and decorate it etc.

no 2, well if they crashed, they would have to pay for the cost themselves, just like any1 else who lies about the car, and also i would define a done up car as, one, when you look at it and say, its done up, you will know!

Mark200

sunnyside wrote: »

OP it's a bad idea.



Are you sure you could afford to pay for the damage? Do you know how much it costs to keep someome in the National Rehab Centre in Dundrum? Not all accidents involve small dents.

So you're saying that if I didn't claim from my car insurance, then the doctors would turn off the life support machine?

I've never heard of someone making that claim before.

jhegarty

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

If I turned up at a bus stop with my twin brother aged 28 covered in shíte and smelling like a cess pit and he is clean as a whistle.

The bus driver allows him on and refuses me. Is that discrimination??

It's discrimination when the Bus drivers charges all 28 year olds extra because your brother messed his bus.

phasers

I'm a 17 year old girl with a provisional, insurance is gonna cost me about 1600 quid. Kind of a pain in the arse considering I have to pay for lessons and everything else, but it's worth it. Just means I'll have to get my full license that much faster I guess!

FlutterinBantam

javaboy wrote: »

Is that a serious question?

By your standards it is.

javaboy

Mark200 wrote: »

So you're saying that if I didn't claim from my car insurance, then the doctors would turn off the life support machine?

I've never heard of someone making that claim before.

No he's saying that you probably wouldn't be able to pay the costs of an accident that left someone needing permanent care. That's the reason we have insurance in the first place. Because some accidents simply cost too much for people to pay for individually. It's inherently an unfair system because for it to work, most people must pay more in than is ever claimed against them. But as Flut says, that's the way the world turns.

FlutterinBantam

jhegarty wrote: »

It's discrimination when the Bus drivers charges all 28 year olds extra because your brother messed his bus.

Exactly thats the point, the bus driver has no stats to back it up.



By the way it is me, not the bro covered in shíte

javaboy

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

By your standards it is.

What's that supposed to mean?

I'm making the point that charging a person more for a service based on their age/gender is discrimination. You introduced some pointless analogy about a person covered in crap not being allowed on a bus. Can you explain the relevance of the question to the discussion because I'm really confused.