Insurance Companies & Discrimination

Dmtiling

The discrimination of Insurance companies in the country is unreal.

I was disqualified from driving in January 2008 for a total of 1 year because I did not have insurance. Now I know people are going to say well it serves you right and blah blah blah. Well I did my years sentence and that should be it. But that is far from it. Now that I have my license back and have learnt my lesson and done the time for the crime I am finding it very hard to get Insurance.

It seems that I am being punished twice for the mistake I made. Not by the courts but by the Insurance companies. I can understand if I was considered a dangerous driver because I was drink driving or because I was put off the road for dangerous driving but thats not the case. My situation was financial.

Once I have served my sentence then that should be it. Who else thinks I am right on this topic.

tin79

you are paying for the fact that insurance companies dont trust you and dont want your business.

this is based on your past record.

Dmtiling

LOL - That is just a ridiculas statment. First to say that someone dosnt want the business is a laugh. Second, the fact that I had a financial situation that led to me missing a payment is no excuse to hike up the cost of the premium.

The situation here should be that I have to pay for the full year outright and cant pay by the month.

Eoin

Did you knowingly drive uninsured?

Dmtiling

Yes I did know I was uninsured.

tin79

Dmtiling wrote: »

LOL - That is just a ridiculas statment. First to say that someone dosntwant the business is a laugh.

if you say so. i would think the fact that they have refused to quote you for insurance would have given you a clue that they dont want your business.

crocro

The actuaries in the insurance companies estimate that people with convictions for driving without insurance are more likely to have accidents, that's why your policy is being loaded. Perhaps they estimate this based on claims history or perhaps they just reckon that if you chance driving without insurance then you're a risk-taker. It's nothing personal- by charging higher risk customers more, they can afford to lower premiums for the lower risk customers. In the US, it's common for insurance companies to load insurance policies for individuals with poor credit history, so a poor financial situation is an indicator of risk.

In a few years you should be clear, but will have to pay a higher premium in the meantime. A lot of people escape banning for a first conviction ofr no insurance. Did you defend yourself in court or maybe you had previous?

PeakOutput

uninsured drivers cost insurance companies millions every year

you are now paying for contributing to that fact

secondly they deem you untrustworthy and therefore a high risk. insurance companies dont want your business(believe it or not) because your a high risk. you are a high risk because of choices that YOU made

take responsibility for your actions and quit bitching

Anan1

Dmtiling wrote: »

Yes I did know I was uninsured.

As the others said, really. You've already shown a willingness to break the law once, which makes you statistically more likely to do it again, and therefore a higher risk.

Dmtiling

I did take responsability for my actions and took the bus for a year. We are all human at the end of the day and everyone makes mistakes.

And yes it was my first conviction.

Also to the above poster. Ever hear of people learning from their mistakes. Also I did my sentence for that mistake, I should not have to continue to be punished.

Stark

Dmtiling wrote: »

LOL - That is just a ridiculas statment. First to say that someone dosnt want the business is a laugh. Second, the fact that I had a financial situation that led to me missing a payment is no excuse to hike up the cost of the premium.

The situation here should be that I have to pay for the full year outright and cant pay by the month.

You're in that category of drivers who only give a **** about the law when it's convenient for them. ie: the high-risk category. Hence you have a higher premium that law-abiding customers.

It has nothing to do with the risk of you missing a payment, it has to do with you having a greater than average chance of deciding that other road traffic laws aren't to your liking and costing them money in claims.

Henry Ford III

Dmtiling wrote: »

I did take responsability for my actions and took the bus for a year. We are all human at the end of the day and everyone makes mistakes.

And yes it was my first conviction.

Also to the above poster. Ever hear of people learning from their mistakes. Also I did my sentence for that mistake, I should not have to continue to be punished.

I think you should have taken the bus somewhat earlier.

You made a very serious, and conscious mistake. You now have to accept the consequences.

lemd

not that i am a fan of insurance companies but learning from your mistakes is irrelevant. Insurance is based on statistics and you are therefore a statistically riskier proposition

PeakOutput

Dmtiling wrote: »

Also to the above poster. Ever hear of people learning from their mistakes. Also I did my sentence for that mistake, I should not have to continue to be punished.

pretty much what stark said with the addendum of i would say a lifetime ban for knowingly driving without insurance is fair and this is from seeing the pain and heartache it causes over and over again when an accident occurs and one person is not insured. you should be happy that you had no accident and can learn from your idiocy

Mr Benevolent

Do you seriously expect to pay the same premium as a consistently law-abiding driver of the same age, considering that you knowingly broke the law?

Insurance companies work on a number of commonsense principles, one of which is 'utmost good faith'. In other words, if you're honest you'll be ok, but if you're not you'll be loaded heavily.

pyramuid man

Stark wrote: »

You're in that category of drivers who only give a **** about the law when it's convenient for them. ie: the high-risk category. Hence you have a higher premium that law-abiding customers.

It has nothing to do with the risk of you missing a payment, it has to do with you having a greater than average chance of deciding that other road traffic laws aren't to your liking and costing them money in claims.

Thats not exactly fair.

What he did is wrong but not one person has asked the situation in which he was caught and therefore are in no position to shout down from the high horses.

If the shoe was on the other foot would you like such comments passed at you.

PeakOutput

pyramuid man wrote: »

Thats not exactly fair.

What he did is wrong but not one person has asked the situation in which he was caught and therefore are in no position to shout down from the high horses.

If the shoe was on the other foot would you like such comments passed at you.

he said he missed a payment due to financial situations and that he knew he was not insured when he drove the car

how he was 'caught' is irrelevant

i dont see one single solitary reason why he should be entitled to the same premium i am as someone who has never broken the law by driving without insurance

Stark

pyramuid man wrote: »

Thats not exactly fair.

What he did is wrong but not one person has asked the situation in which he was caught and therefore are in no position to shout down from the high horses.

If the shoe was on the other foot would you like such comments passed at you.

Does anyone ask to be a male driver? Does anyone ask to be outside the ideal age bracket? Being sorry is irrelevant. All that's relevant is risk.

lemd

Stark wrote: »

Does anyone ask to be a male driver? Does anyone ask to be outside the ideal age bracket? Being sorry is irrelevant. All that's relevant is risk.

well said

Top Dog

Dmtiling wrote: »

Also to the above poster. Ever hear of people learning from their mistakes. Also I did my sentence for that mistake, I should not have to continue to be punished.

Your sentance doesn't end the very day you get your licence back. To view it that way would be somewhat short-sighted. Just the same as anyone else who loses their licence for whatever reason (drink-driving, dangerous etc). Your sentance ends when you can honestly answer no to the following question from an insurance company ...

Any claims or convictions in the past 5 years?

Its just the cross you have to bear for your previous choices. I've been there, done that, and had to live with the repurcussions just like everyone else.

deise girlie

I actually sympatise with the poster on the basis that I agree everyone makes mistakes and they have obviously learned from it. The bashing he is getting is unfair. I know of lots of people with a genuine disregard for the law and continue to drive with no insurance even after being banned for this offence. He made a mistake, obviously learned from it, got the bus for a year and is now trying to move on.

However I think your policy should still be loaded because at the end of the day you commited a crime and if you want to drive you will just have to bite the bullet and pay for the loaded insurance for a few years.

I had a genuine accidant due to weather conditions. I was a young named driver on my mothers policy at the time of the accident, when I wanted to get my own insurance the following year my policy cost me 5000+ pounds the first year and I had to get it through an English company cause the Irish ones wouldn't touch me so I do understand your frustration.

Eoin

pyramuid man wrote: »

What he did is wrong but not one person has asked the situation in which he was caught and therefore are in no position to shout down from the high horses.

You can't shout "high horse" when someone is called out for being very irresponsible. Under what circumstances do you think it would have been OK? Barring an extreme medical emergency, or an extreme case of bad luck to be caught moving the car from the street to the driveway, I can't think of any.

pyramuid man wrote: »

If the shoe was on the other foot would you like such comments passed at you.

If I knowingly drove uninsured, then I'd expect a bit of abuse.

Steve

Dmtiling wrote: »

Second, the fact that I had a financial situation that led to me missing a payment is no excuse to hike up the cost of the premium.

No, the fact that you knowingly and wilfully disobeyed the law and drove regardless shows that you don't hold much respect for the law.
Someone with no respect for the law is considered high risk in my book.

You may have learnt your lesson over this but it could have been a lot worse. Had you been involved in an accident whilst uninsured then you would still be personally liable for any costs to the other party - that could have cost you your home or a court order to make repayments for the rest of your life.

Be thankful that it's only a couple of high insurance premiums you have to worry about.

pyramuid man

Stark wrote: »

Does anyone ask to be a male driver? Does anyone ask to be outside the ideal age bracket? Being sorry is irrelevant. All that's relevant is risk.

I am not saying that he is not a risk as obviously is and I was not saying that he should get a cheaper premium.

I was simply saying that the manner in which you replied was very rude and that no-one deserves to be spoken like that in any situation.

kayos

Ah hold on lads read his post again. He is finding it hard to get insurance. Its not that he is getting loaded because he is not getting that far!

Now in simple terms has any one here every got point’s for anything? Be it speeding or on the phone while driving? Well odds are some have. In those situations those drivers have shown they can ignore the law just as much as the OP. Yet they don’t get refused insurance, hell they will most likely not even get their premiums loaded unless they have 4 or more points. Same can be said about driving without tax or an NCT both are requirements but if you don’t get a conviction out of them your insurance company don’t say a word as they don’t know and when they ask do you have any convictions you can honestly say no. So saying he should be refused insurance because he ignored a law means any one who ever got any points should be refused.

Now I’m not saying driving without insurance is a smart thing, far from it. But at the same time people need to read the guys post to see he is not complaining about cost but the fact he is not even being quoted. I think the companies should quote him but should load the policy as they would the policy of someone that’s got say 6 or 8 points on their license. As yes you are a bigger risk. But point blank refusal of insurance is a bit much imho. Hell there are people who have been caught for drink driving but get off scot free due to technical reasons e.g. the steam of their piss if they go to the bathroom (there was a recent case where this was the reason a conviction could not be secured). In my view such a driver is a much higher risk when compared to the OP yet they keep going without so much as a cent increase in their premiums.

Yes uninsured drivers cost us, yes it stupid, but no total refusal of insurance is not the answer.

Stark

The OP never said he was refused insurance; he just said he found it "hard to get insurance" which he later clarified as having to pay a higher premium.

Mr Benevolent

Second, the fact that I had a financial situation that led to me missing a payment is no excuse to hike up the cost of the premium.

Yup, he's getting insured all right.

kayos

Well that will teach me to miss a post

Any way I stand by my post as some companies will refuse to quote based on a previous conviction. I also stand by what I said about others here most likely having broken laws and those actions having no impact on their insurance. People in glass houses and all that.

OP you are a higher risk and this carries a higher premium deal with it.

daveharnett

Dmtiling wrote: »

It seems that I am being punished twice for the mistake I made. Not by the courts but by the Insurance companies.

The insurance companies are not punishing you OP. They couldn't care less about the morality of your actions - they are looking after their bottom line and their shareholders.

Your use of the word 'discrimination' is entirely inappropriate. Given that they are quite rightly entitled to discriminate based on your age and gender, it is ludicrous to suggest that they shouldn't discriminate based on your actions!

Incidentally, I don't think you fully appreciate the seriousness of what you did. Driving without insurance is not just a technicality, it is effectively stealing from those of us who do pay up every month. You have come to the wrong place to find sympathy.

Guy:Incognito

deise girlie wrote: »

I actually sympatise with the poster on the basis that I agree everyone makes mistakes and they have obviously learned from it. The bashing he is getting is unfair. I know of lots of people with a genuine disregard for the law and continue to drive with no insurance even after being banned for this offence. He made a mistake, obviously learned from it, got the bus for a year and is now trying to move on.
.

How does the insurance company know he's learnt from his mistake?

Dmtiling

I have been reading through the posts and they are interesting. Here are the full details of what exactly happened.

I had passed my driving test and got my full licence so I shopped around for cheaper insurance. I was currently paying over a thousand for my premium and that was just to high and i had also missed my last payment. My next payment was due that day but i did not have the cash in the bank to cover it. I got a quote for 600 from another company. This quote was on a friday. I rang around a few other companies and no one matched that price so I cancelled my policy with the company I was with at the time and then rang the other company which had given me the 600 quote.

The work I was doing ment I was going to be paid at the weekend. So I would have the cash then to pay for my new policy. When I rang the new company to go ahead with the policy there was no answer. I tried a second time and still no answer, the next time I rang the offices were closed.

I had allready cancelled my original premium and therefore was uninsured from that point on. To get the money to pay for my new policy I had to work over the weekend and therefore had to drive. I was stopped at a checkpoint on the sunday.

I still had my disc etc in the van but did not have my licence with me and was asked t produce within 10 days, this I did and brought my new insurance and my old insurance certs with me on the monday. The garda told me it would be ok since I was only uninsured for the weekend and he would not take it any further. Almost a year later I got a summons to court.

I held my hands up in court and admitted that I knew I was wrong and should not have drivin over the weekend.

Now I do not consider myself a dangerous driver and have allways upheld the law up unitil this point and this stupid mistake, never had any points on my licence or had never been in court for anything.

Also very few companies are even giving me a quote and some are. I think more time should be taking by the insurance companies to look at the case details instead of just putting a label on me as high risk.

I dont mind paying the extra few quid on my premium since I know there is nothing I can do about it. However, I do think insurance companies have us all by the balls because of the position they are in.

Anan1

Dmtiling wrote: »

I think more time should be taking by the insurance companies to look at the case details instead of just putting a label on me as high risk.

But the case details are that you knowingly drove without insurance? In their eyes (and quite reasonably so) this makes you high risk. I can't understand which part of the above you don't get?

Dmtiling

I am not expecting to get off scot free - I am a risk in a way but I am not as much of a risk than somebody who drives drunk.

Anan1

Dmtiling wrote: »

I am not expecting to get off scot free - I am a risk in a way but I am not as much of a risk than somebody who drives drunk.

In the nicest way - what's that got to do with anything?

Steve

Dmtiling wrote: »

I am not expecting to get off scot free - I am a risk in a way but I am not as much of a risk than somebody who drives drunk.

Are you saying someone with a drink driving conviction would be treated better or even the same?
I think not.

Dmtiling

I know somebody who was convicted of drink driving, got a 3 month ban and continued to drive, never informed the insurance company and is still paying a low premium.

Anyway - I just wanted to see what you all thought. Was good to read all the comments and yes I have learnt my lesson and believe me will never happen again.

The main point I was making is that insurance companies can seem to discriminate against people and its ok becuase they have us all in a corner and there is nothing we can do about it because we have to get insurance.

Stark

Dmtiling wrote: »

I know somebody who was convicted of drink driving, got a 3 month ban and continued to drive, never informed the insurance company and is still paying a low premium.

And driving around with an expensive disc that he might as well have drawn up with crayons in his windscreen...

robtri

Dmtiling wrote: »

I am not expecting to get off scot free - I am a risk in a way but I am not as much of a risk than somebody who drives drunk.

YES you are... is the short answer....

You knowingly and purposely broke the law, you at the time had no regard for the Law or for the insurance companies who have to pay out millions every year from the M.I.B. fund, you didn't care a damn about them when you did this, all you where thinking of was how to save a few bucks... well now they don't give a damn about you and the ones that do have any interest in you, are loading the crap out of you to recover the losses uninsured drivers, like you, cost them every year.......

Deadzone

OP - You are not beng 'Discriminated' against, you are being assesed, just like everyone else, as to how much of a risk you are to the Insurance company and which category you fit in, their only means of doing this is by age, experience, type of vehicle, cover required and driving history.

Unfortunately for you, regardless of circumstances, you have a recent conviction and so are assesed as a higher risk.

Basicaly you have to pay up for a few years or go back to using the bus.

Anan1

Dmtiling wrote: »

The main point I was making is that insurance companies can seem to discriminate against people and its ok becuase they have us all in a corner and there is nothing we can do about it because we have to get insurance.

It's not about discrimination, it's about risk. You can shop around for cheaper insurance elsewhere - the problem here isn't the insurance companies but the fact that you represent a higher than average risk.

Dmtiling

Stark wrote: »

And driving around with an expensive disc that he might as well have drawn up with crayons in his windscreen...

True

And by the way im not looking for sympathy from anyone im just looking for people thoughts on the matter, thats all. I have my opinions and you all have yours.

All interesting and enjoyable to read. Thanks