Why do Garda get cheaper insurance?

Beta Ray Bill

So Basically today I was looking for insurance on a number of websites

So we have all been there..

You enter in your personal details, the reg of your Car, click next, and you get a quote.

I was doing the same today, I found that my insurance quote was very high on a particular type of car:

28 Years old
Living in Dublin 1
Occupation: IT Person

Car was a 2006 Renault Scenic DCI

Quote was €830

Which I thought was VERY high
So I started changing my occupation to pull back different results:

When I put in Garda the Quote went down by over €100!!!!

Is this some deal that the insurance companies have with the Garda?

I know some professions do dictate that you will be on the road less/say a lot about the type of person you are.
But I think €100 off is a bit excessive and unfair, that in comparison to a Priest whom would have only gotten €10 off the price I was quoted.

I checked a number of other occupations too

An Au Pair would have to pay €70 less
A Minister of Religion would have to by €3 more
and surprisingly a judge would have to pay the same premium as me.

Where the hell do they get the figures from???

MYSTICA1

One word ... Statistics

Oral Surgeon

grahambo wrote: »

Where the hell do they get the figures from???

From years of assessing risk and paying out on claims....

You IT guys spend half your time on your iphones so are an accident risk....;);)

Doyler92

Would I be right in saying that most Garda do advanced drivng training hence why they pay cheaper insurance?

CharlieCroker

I would imagine that a Garda is statistically seen as less likely to break the law and as such, are less of a liability.

Equally so, it's possible that garda representitive organisations have a group scheme with these companies

Mr Benevolent

Hmmm. How about accidentally filling in the wrong one?

Younganne

Confab wrote: »

Hmmm. How about accidentally filling in the wrong one?

That would make your insurance null & void!!!

MugMugs

One would assume that most Gardai have an advanced driving course. This is probably not the case and most of the drivers you see on the road drive under "Chiefs Permission"

Why is their Insurance lower ? Because the risk is lower. Despite the fact that they work shifts and could be driving at anti social hours they are more aware of RTA rules than the average joe soap and less likely to be of an RTA risk.

MetzgerMeister

It's also to do with the fact that they are civil servants. My parents are civil servants (dad's a teacher, mother's a nurse) and they can avail of special insurance benefits both motor and home.

Berty

It's perception.

Garda see a lot of horrible things on the roads so normally drive a little more responsibly because they have been the ones delivering the bad news to families.

Insurance assessors and claims assessors( I was one ) were also perceived to be in a lesser risk so cheaper insurance.

Some Insurance companies do not insure sales reps because we drive soo many hours per day and they try to get into our private car and could be very tired.

It's crass but that's life.

coylemj

einheisserschre wrote: »

It's also to do with the fact that they are civil servants. My parents are civil servants (dad's a teacher, mother's a nurse) and they can avail of special insurance benefits both motor and home.

That's a myth put about by clever marketing people. I was in the waiting area of a finance company once and read some of the leaflets on the rack on the wall, they had 'special' car loan deals for every category of public sector worker i.e. seperate leaflets for Gardai, Nurses and Teachers and guess what? Yup, every one of them was offering the same deal and if I remember correctly it was more expensive than a standard term loan then available from the main banks. Tell someone you're giving them a special rate for some sevice and it's truly amazing the number who will accept the sales pitch without comparing that price with other providers.

Many years ago an insurance company offered a special premium for motor insurance for Gardai, what happened next was a salutary lesson in how to lose money. All of the older Gardai with big no claims bonuses looked at the 'special' rates and said 'no thanks' so the offer was almost exclusively taken up by younger Gardai who proceeded to rack up a series of spectacular claims and the scheme was withdrawn after a couple of years. The number crunchers had looked at the overall age profile of the Gardai and had assumed that they would get every member of the force to sign up, they didn't, they got the high risk element and it cost them dear.

If Gardai get charged less as a profession today it's probably because they are not driving at commute times and are therefore far less likely to be involved in a shunt at traffic lights which as far as I can see from driving around Dublin is the most common cause of traffic accidents in the city.

Profiling people by where they live, their age, their occupation and claims record is all part of the insurance business. Jockeys, publicans and people in the entertainment business are considered the highest risk and get seriously loaded by motor insurers.

challengemaster

Doyler92 wrote: »

Would I be right in saying that most Garda do advanced drivng training hence why they pay cheaper insurance?

Many of them never get near a driving course.

http://www.herald.ie/news/untrained-garda-drivers-putting-the-public-at-risk-1576561.html

I'm aware it's from 2008, but...

The standard garda driving course in Templemore has room for only 600 participants each year.

But even if the course's capacity was increased, there would still be a backlog because of its 40pc failure rate.

Now, considering the lack of money for all ES at the moment, I highly doubt that that number of places has increased since then. And I also doubt it's been outsourced for the same reason.

If you do the maths - assuming that a continuous 360 passed per year since that article, then there's still over 1500 members that were already in the gardaí, still driving on permission without completing a course, and any members since that have joined.

Lord Nikon

I pay 1000 fully comp, I drive a taxi and Im 31 years old. Go figure.

Henry Ford III

MugMugs wrote: »

One would assume that most Gardai have an advanced driving course. This is probably not the case and most of the drivers you see on the road drive under "Chiefs Permission"

Why is their Insurance lower ? Because the risk is lower. Despite the fact that they work shifts and could be driving at anti social hours they are more aware of RTA rules than the average joe soap and less likely to be of an RTA risk.

Many Gardai have learner permits. Some are advanced drivers admittedly.

seamus

neuromancer wrote: »

I pay 1000 fully comp, I drive a taxi and Im 31 years old. Go figure.

That's a great quote for business insurance tbh. Most businesses are paying multiples of that for plain old public liability insurance.

To answer the OP, it all comes down to statistics really and who is likely to have an accident. Change your profession to any kind of entertainer - particularly a musician or DJ - and you'll see the quote jump by 25%. This is to account for that fact that these people typically work late hours involving drugs and alcohol and therefore present a higher risk.

Jagle

why dont insurance companies reduce price for people who dont drink? surely none drinkers would benefit from savings as the likely hood of them drink driving is zero?

tho how does one prove you are a none drinker?suppose you claim you are and are caught drink driving, insurance null and void?

MetzgerMeister

Jagle wrote: »

why dont insurance companies reduce price for people who dont drink? surely none drinkers would benefit from savings as the likely hood of them drink driving is zero?

tho how does one prove you are a none drinker?suppose you claim you are and are caught drink driving, insurance null and void?

Your insurance would be null and void even if you were caught drink driving. Let alone telling an insurance company that you didn't drink!

Jagle

einheisserschre wrote: »

Your insurance would be null and void even if you were caught drink driving. Let alone telling an insurance company that you didn't drink!

does drink driving make your insurance null and void?

never heard of anyone being caught drink driving also in court for no insurance

seamus

Jagle wrote: »

tho how does one prove you are a none drinker?suppose you claim you are and are caught drink driving, insurance null and void?

Legislation doesn't let them null and void. If you crashed while drink-driving you will only be covered 3rd party anyway, so the big cost for insurance companies from drink-drivers is for having to pay 3rd party costs.

Since they will always have to pay 3rd party costs, there is little benefit to them in offering lower insurance to non-drinkers. That is, anyone could say they're a non-drinker, but they would still be covered 3rd party in the event of a crash.

How do you prove that you never drink? What do you do if you decide to have a glass of champagne to celebrate a wedding? Ring your insurance company up and let them know that you've had a drink so please hike your premium?

Jagle

seamus wrote: »

Legislation doesn't let them null and void. If you crashed while drink-driving you will only be covered 3rd party anyway, so the big cost for insurance companies from drink-drivers is for having to pay 3rd party costs.

Since they will always have to pay 3rd party costs, there is little benefit to them in offering lower insurance to non-drinkers. That is, anyone could say they're a non-drinker, but they would still be covered 3rd party in the event of a crash.

How do you prove that you never drink? What do you do if you decide to have a glass of champagne to celebrate a wedding? Ring your insurance company up and let them know that you've had a drink so please hike your premium?

ah didnt know about the 3rd party stuff, makes sense i guess

and ya it would be hard to police but on the topic of funny insurance premiums based upon arbitrary variables drinking is surely a big factor too. tho i guess your right too hard to police.

ShadowHearth

seamus wrote: »

That's a great quote for business insurance tbh. Most businesses are paying multiples of that for plain old public liability insurance.

To answer the OP, it all comes down to statistics really and who is likely to have an accident. Change your profession to any kind of entertainer - particularly a musician or DJ - and you'll see the quote jump by 25%. This is to account for that fact that these people typically work late hours involving drugs and alcohol and therefore present a higher risk.

i am not sure, but i think he is speaking about his personal car. i might be wrong.

i remember talking to a taxi fella who had 2 Toyota camry's. one personal car, the other one TAXI. ( i have seen bouth, as i knew where he lives ). He said it was really hard to get a qoute for his personal camry. they just refused to insure him. the fella was about 40-50 years old with 5 million ncbs at this stage. in the end he got insured it, but for stupid price.

i am a chef, and for me qoute is higher then for other people. why? because chefs are high risk alkaholiks. :rolleyes:

MetzgerMeister

Jagle wrote: »

does drink driving make your insurance null and void?

never heard of anyone being caught drink driving also in court for no insurance

It does for your own car but the person who's car you hit would be covered.

seamus

Jagle wrote: »

and ya it would be hard to police but on the topic of funny insurance premiums based upon arbitrary variables drinking is surely a big factor too. tho i guess your right too hard to police.

Well I imagine the number of people who never drink is actually quite low. Even people who aren't into it may have a glass of champagne the odd time or maybe wine with an important dinner.

So then it becomes a grey area - the customer could always say, "No, I don't usually drink, but it was my godson's christening, so I had two pints to celebrate and it went to me head...."

So I just think the potential for people to take the piss and insurance companies to get screwed over, outweighs any possible benefit they might get from attracting complete teetotallers.

There is a similar thing in health insurance where they ask the "Do you smoke?" question. Impossible to police really, but in their case if the person is admitted with a smoking-related illness, the insurer can wash their hands and walk away without paying. For car insurance they can't do the same.

Jagle

seamus wrote: »

There is a similar thing in health insurance where they ask the "Do you smoke?" question. Impossible to police really, but in their case if the person is admitted with a smoking-related illness, the insurer can wash their hands and walk away without paying. For car insurance they can't do the same.

indeed i suppose this is where the difference is.
shame that cos id love cheaper insurance for not drinking.

question if you can be covered by two options when it comes to employment, for instance if have a job and are studying in university do you pick job title or student?

stimpson

Jagle wrote: »

question if you can be covered by two options when it comes to employment, for instance if have a job and are studying in university do you pick job title or student?

This is worth thinking about. There are various IT jobs, such as Computer Programmer and Software Engineer that are interchangeable, but may have different insurance weighting.

pa990

@ OP

Do any other profession other than Gardai result in a lower quote than what you get ??

Jagle

stimpson wrote: »

This is worth thinking about. There are various IT jobs, such as Computer Programmer and Software Engineer that are interchangeable, but may have different insurance weighting.

thinking about how?
im defo gonna choose the one with the lower price, but what if they decide that your job is your primary employment and that student is secondary and so if you choose student they will null and void it?

stimpson

Jagle wrote: »

thinking about how?
im defo gonna choose the one with the lower price, but what if they decide that your job is your primary employment and that student is secondary and so if you choose student they will null and void it?

OP mentioned they were an "IT Person". There are many IT roles that could be interchangeable.

seamus

ShadowHearth wrote: »

i am not sure, but i think he is speaking about his personal car. i might be wrong.

Well in that case he's probably being loaded like all professional drivers. Truckers also pay higher personal insurance.
I guess the justification there is that a professional driver is going to be more road-weary after a full day's driving, than someone who's been sitting at a computer all day.

I'd love to see the actual data for these though and where it came from.

Pulsating Star

I believe there is also a loading for any job which can call for different routes/destinations rather than a fixed commute. In a past life I got insurance while in construction and this was a loading factor.