Insurance loading based on length of residency

MadsL

Just to update on some research I just did as part of this thread. and to see the reaction.

Let's say you decide to go live in the UK. You have never driven before. You take your test and one year later decide to buy a car.

Would it surprise you to learn that a person the same age born in the UK and resident all their life gets to pay £1634.17, whilst you, the new UK resident get to pay £1921.09.

Here's the details. Any thoughts?

coylemj

You're classified as a migrant worker and therefore are considered a higher risk.

MadsL

coylemj wrote: »

You're classified as a migrant worker and therefore are considered a higher risk.

If you are a permanent resident of the UK?

Why would your driving risk be higher?

Cookie_Monster

MadsL wrote: »

Would it surprise you to learn that a person the same age born in the UK and resident all their life gets to pay £1634.17, whilst you, the new UK resident get to pay £1921.09.

no it would not surprise me, why would it?

MadsL

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

no it would not surprise me, why would it?

Because all other information being equal, you are being asked to pay almost a 17.5% premium for not having being actually born in the UK.

Seem fair?

coylemj

MadsL wrote: »

If you are a permanent resident of the UK?

Why would your driving risk be higher?

You weren't born there, you arrived only a year ago, how do you make out that you're a permanent (your emphasis) resident?

galwayjohn89

Seems fair to me.

If you lived there your whole life you would be more likely to know all the ins and outs of driving in that country.

Cookie_Monster

MadsL wrote: »

Because all other information being equal, you are being asked to pay almost a 17.5% premium for not having being actually born in the UK.

Seem fair?

well it may be a little high but otherwise yes. You are not familiar with all the laws and customs and the insurance company have no idea of your background outside of the UK.

Let says you are Irish and lived in Ireland your whole life before that. It's well noted the Irish have a certain cultural lax attitude when it comes to obeying or caring about laws, especially on the roads. That implies you will be a greater risk than a UK person when the culture is much different.

coylemj

Vuzuggu wrote: »

Seems fair to me.

If you lived there your whole life you would be more likely to know all the ins and outs of driving in that country.

I think it's slightly more subtle than that and does not involve ignorance of local traffic regulations. Migrant workers have a poor driving record because in the main they tend to have no roots in the country they're working in and their lifestyle tends to rotate around work/drink/work/drink etc.

There is also the issue that in the absence of a European-wide recognition of driving bans, people with poor driving records who are banned in their home countries go on the move, make false declarations to get insurance and end up repeating their bad driving practices in their adopted country.

In the OP's case he has no licence from his home country to produce to the UK insurance company so he matches the classic case of a banned driver on the run from his home country.

CiniO

coylemj wrote: »

I think it's slightly more subtle than that and does not involve ignorance of local traffic regulations. Migrant workers have a poor driving record because in the main they tend to have no roots in the country they're working in and their lifestyle tends to rotate around work/drink/work/drink etc.

There is also the issue that in the absence of a European-wide recognition of driving bans, people with poor driving records who are banned in their home countries go on the move, make false declarations to get insurance and end up repeating their bad driving practices in their adopted country.

In the OP's case he has no licence from his home country to produce to the UK insurance company so he matches the classic case of a banned driver on the run from his home country.

So you are saying that because someone comes from the same place as some criminals, he should be treated like so.
That's biggest bu115hit I heard.

MadsL

coylemj wrote: »

I think it's slightly more subtle than that and does not involve ignorance of local traffic regulations. Migrant workers have a poor driving record because in the main they tend to have no roots in the country they're working in and their lifestyle tends to rotate around work/drink/work/drink etc.

Migrant Muslims for instance, always on the lash.
Massive assumption with no basis in fact isn't it?

There is also the issue that in the absence of a European-wide recognition of driving bans, people with poor driving records who are banned in their home countries go on the move, make false declarations to get insurance and end up repeating their bad driving practices in their adopted country.

Is there evidence of this or is it another assumption? Couldn't this be solved with a police background check.

In the OP's case he has no licence from his home country to produce to the UK insurance company so he matches the classic case of a banned driver on the run from his home country.

Couldn't the "born there' resident equally have been banned in a migrant country? Both have a licence only for one year.

coylemj wrote: »

You weren't born there, you arrived only a year ago, how do you make out that you're a permanent (your emphasis) resident?

It's a legal status. You can if you wish remain as long as you like.

Vuzuggu wrote: »

Seems fair to me.

If you lived there your whole life you would be more likely to know all the ins and outs of driving in that country.

I see. By walking around you are familar with the skill of driving. Gotcha.
You have clearly never taught anyone to drive.

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

well it may be a little high but otherwise yes. You are not familiar with all the laws and customs and the insurance company have no idea of your background outside of the UK.

Let says you are Irish and lived in Ireland your whole life before that. It's well noted the Irish have a certain cultural lax attitude when it comes to obeying or caring about laws, especially on the roads. That implies you will be a greater risk than a UK person when the culture is much different.

Irish people should have a higher insurance rates than British people because they are Irish. Wow. Interesting viewpoint.

Cookie_Monster

MadsL wrote: »

Irish people should have a higher insurance rates than British people because they are Irish. Wow. Interesting viewpoint.

well it's exactly the same reasoning behind charging younger people more because they are young...

MadsL

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

well it's exactly the same reasoning behind charging younger people more because they are young...

Yep, i have always argued driving experience is what counts.

oldyouth

Add in the possibility that you might be off abroad again should they need you to assist in the defence of a claim which may occur

bumper234

MadsL wrote: »

If you are a permanent resident of the UK?

Why would your driving risk be higher?

For all they know you could be from one of those crazy countries that drive on the wrong side of the road and therefore are more liable to go on the motorway the wrong way causing multiple pile ups and deaths.

discombobulate

MadsL wrote: »

By walking around you are familar with the skill of driving. Gotcha.
You have clearly never taught anyone to drive.

I think people may also have been passengers in cars before they drove and didn't just walk everywhere :rolleyes:

Marcusm

MadsL wrote: »

Couldn't the "born there' resident equally have been banned in a migrant country? Both have a licence only for one year.



It's a legal status. You can if you wish remain as long as you like.

I don't want to interrupt your flow but which legal status? Only British passport holders living overseas or CTA nationals would have indefinite residency ("not subject to immigration controls") on arrival. ILR/PR would take a period of residency (they're now aiming for a 5 year minimum) to achieve such status.

dr.fuzzenstein

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

well it may be a little high but otherwise yes. You are not familiar with all the laws and customs and the insurance company have no idea of your background outside of the UK.

Let says you are Irish and lived in Ireland your whole life before that. It's well noted the Irish have a certain cultural lax attitude when it comes to obeying or caring about laws, especially on the roads. That implies you will be a greater risk than a UK person when the culture is much different.

Not in Ireland.
Was told I would have to pay a 25% premium on my insurance because I have a German licence.
One call to the ombudsman had that sorted. No one can be charged extra on the basis of their nationality.
As for how long I'm resident? No one even asked this.
This should just be called "Loading your premium for any excuse we can possibly think of cause we're greedy"
And all the people who are OK with that are saying "We like paying more, so give me all you got"

H3llR4iser

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Not in Ireland.
Was told I would have to pay a 25% premium on my insurance because I have a German licence.
One call to the ombudsman had that sorted. No one can be charged extra on the basis of their nationality.
As for how long I'm resident? No one even asked this.
This should just be called "Loading your premium for any excuse we can possibly think of cause we're greedy"
And all the people who are OK with that are saying "We like paying more, so give me all you got"

You were lucky, they charge me 100% more (read: double) because I have an EU license, in fact bringing my premium exactly in line with that of a Learner permit holder. It's serious bull****.

dr.fuzzenstein

H3llR4iser wrote: »

You were lucky, they charge me 100% more (read: double) because I have an EU license, in fact bringing my premium exactly in line with that of a Learner permit holder. It's serious bull****.

Now that they cannot do.

coylemj

They can't discriminate based on a specific nationality because that would be categorised as racism so they consider all migrant workers as high risk for the simple reason that large numbers of people from eastern European countries have moved to the UK in the past few years, some of them have come from countries with appalling statistics for road fatalities on the road and they have brought their bad driving practices with them.

Please don't let political correctness blind us to the fact that people from certain eastern European countries are over represented in the Irish courts when it comes to serious traffic accidents.

The fact that they can't discriminate at the level of nationality is why the OP is falling into a profile which says 'high risk', he is being tarred with the same brush.

Marcusm

coylemj wrote: »

They can't discriminate based on a specific nationality because that would be categorised as racism so they consider all migrant workers as high risk for the simple reason that large numbers of people from eastern European countries have moved to the UK in the past few years, some of them have come from countries with appalling statistics for road fatalities on the road and they have brought their bad driving practices with them.

Please don't let political correctness blind us to the fact that people from certain eastern European countries are over represented in the Irish courts when it comes to serious traffic accidents.

The fact that they can't discriminate at the level of nationality is why the OP is falling into a profile which says 'high risk', he is being tarred with the same brush.

You could say the same about men/boys from Donegal but that's not permitted either!

enricoh

Eastern Europeans are well represented in my local paper for tax, insurance and drink driving. Rarely if ever any Chinese, Filipino s etc.
If I was a risk assessor for an insurance company I know who' s insurance would be higher

hognef

MadsL wrote: »

Just to update on some research I just did as part of this thread. and to see the reaction.

Let's say you decide to go live in the UK. You have never driven before. You take your test and one year later decide to buy a car.

Would it surprise you to learn that a person the same age born in the UK and resident all their life gets to pay £1634.17, whilst you, the new UK resident get to pay £1921.09.

Here's the details. Any thoughts?

Totally agree this practice is dubious at best. I am personally a victim of something similar, in Ireland: Due to my licence being non-irish, my premium with 123.ie is nearly doubled, from 3xx euro to 6xx euro. This despite the fact that my EEA licence is directly substitutable for an Irish one, at a similar cost to renewing a licence, and also despite the fact that I've been resident here for 7 years, and been claim-free for the best part of two decades.

Surely they don't seriously think the risk of insuring me halves if I (through a straightforward paper exercise only) substitute my licence for a foreign one?

MadsL

oldyouth wrote: »

Add in the possibility that you might be off abroad again should they need you to assist in the defence of a claim which may occur

A risk that is not limited to the recently arrived. Anyone can skip the country.

OSI wrote: »

How many threads are you going to create on this topic? You have a serious chip on your shoulder about the whole thing.

I'm not just creating threads, and if you would bother to read them you would find that so far 3 insurance companies have been forced to change discriminatory practices as a result of my actions. It seems relevant to the motors forum so here it is; feel free not to read them if they upset you.

Marcusm wrote: »

I don't want to interrupt your flow but which legal status? Only British passport holders living overseas or CTA nationals would have indefinite residency ("not subject to immigration controls") on arrival. ILR/PR would take a period of residency (they're now aiming for a 5 year minimum) to achieve such status.

I didn't say "not subject to immigration controls". Immigration status really has no bearing on driving skill.

Besides some studies are showing immigrants to be better drivers than the locals, an example: http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/health/story/2011/07/06/driving-immigrants-crashes.html

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Not in Ireland.
Was told I would have to pay a 25% premium on my insurance because I have a German licence.
One call to the ombudsman had that sorted. No one can be charged extra on the basis of their nationality.
As for how long I'm resident? No one even asked this.
This should just be called "Loading your premium for any excuse we can possibly think of cause we're greedy"
And all the people who are OK with that are saying "We like paying more, so give me all you got"

The three companies that I mentioned were until recently getting around that by asking questions like "How long have you lived in Ireland?" or "How long have you lived in Ireland/UK in the past three years?"

H3llR4iser wrote: »

You were lucky, they charge me 100% more (read: double) because I have an EU license, in fact bringing my premium exactly in line with that of a Learner permit holder. It's serious bull****.

I agree. I'm on my fourth international move, the driving differences are massively overstated.

coylemj wrote: »

They can't discriminate based on a specific nationality because that would be categorised as racism so they consider all migrant workers as high risk for the simple reason that large numbers of people from eastern European countries have moved to the UK in the past few years, some of them have come from countries with appalling statistics for road fatalities on the road and they have brought their bad driving practices with them.

Please don't let political correctness blind us to the fact that people from certain eastern European countries are over represented in the Irish courts when it comes to serious traffic accidents.

I would love to see some evidence for that. Could you find some?

The fact that they can't discriminate at the level of nationality is why the OP is falling into a profile which says 'high risk', he is being tarred with the same brush.

You think that they should be permited to discriminate of nationality? I fail to see that residency has ANYTHING to do with driving.

Marcusm wrote: »

You could say the same about men/boys from Donegal but that's not permitted either!

Precisely, could you imagine insurance companies asking how long you have lived in Dublin before quoting?

enricoh wrote: »

Eastern Europeans are well represented in my local paper for tax, insurance and drink driving. Rarely if ever any Chinese, Filipino s etc. If I was a risk assessor for an insurance company I know who' s insurance would be higher

You would quote based on reports in your local paper. The mind boggles.

hognef wrote: »

Totally agree this practice is dubious at best. I am personally a victim of something similar, in Ireland: Due to my licence being non-irish, my premium with 123.ie is nearly doubled, from 3xx euro to 6xx euro. This despite the fact that my EEA licence is directly substitutable for an Irish one, at a similar cost to renewing a licence, and also despite the fact that I've been resident here for 7 years, and been claim-free for the best part of two decades.

Surely they don't seriously think the risk of insuring me halves if I (through a straightforward paper exercise only) substitute my licence for a foreign one?

I'd be inclined to take the Irish test rather than substitute, but I agree that this practice is odious to say the least.

Insurance companies seem to a law unto themselves.

CiniO

enricoh wrote: »

Eastern Europeans are well represented in my local paper for tax, insurance and drink driving. Rarely if ever any Chinese, Filipino s etc.
If I was a risk assessor for an insurance company I know who' s insurance would be higher

So you are saying, just because I'm Polish and lived my first 25 years there, I should be charged more for insurance in Ireland, because some other lads from Poland do drink driving and crash their cars in here?

hardCopy

Marcusm wrote: »

You could say the same about men/boys from Donegal but that's not permitted either!

The postcode you live in can have a massive impact on your premium.

Marcusm

MadsL wrote: »

I didn't say "not subject to immigration controls". Immigration status really has no bearing on driving skill.

I was just questioning your point about "permanent residents" - those are persons who are not subject to immigration controls (by definition) and with the limited exceptions I mentioned, they would be people who've lived there for at least 5 years. Not trying to undermine the legitimacy of your comments, just trying to ensure that the terms are corect.

Marcusm

hardCopy wrote: »

The postcode you live in can have a massive impact on your premium.

Indded, I know that quite well living in what some woudl regard as a less than salubrious post code in London but with secure parking.

The point I was making referred to the men/boys who can't be discriminated against. A similar case may be taken in respect of foreign nationals (potentially a protected class) but by choosing to attack holders of foreign permits (not necessarily foreign persons), they may not be in breach of the rules.

MadsL

hardCopy wrote: »

The postcode you live in can have a massive impact on your premium.

That's related to the crime rate in the area; a better analogy would have insurance companies loading your premium on the basis that you once lived in a high crime area.

MadsL

Marcusm wrote: »

Indded, I know that quite well living in what some woudl regard as a less than salubrious post code in London but with secure parking.

The point I was making referred to the men/boys who can't be discriminated against. A similar case may be taken in respect of foreign nationals (potentially a protected class) but by choosing to attack holders of foreign permits (not necessarily foreign persons), they may not be in breach of the rules.

Data protection rules prohibit asking excessive and irrelevant questions.

I'm considering asking the information commissioner in the UK to take a look at this one, specifically as it also has a bearing on the last ins company in Ireland to be asking residency-based questions.

rocky

hognef wrote: »

Surely they don't seriously think the risk of insuring me halves if I (through a straightforward paper exercise only) substitute my licence for a foreign one?

You can't get points on your foreign license.

MadsL

rocky wrote: »

You can't get points on your foreign license.

No, but you are required to report fines and/or convictions to your insurance company.

Points are just a different way of tracking your driving history.

hognef

MadsL wrote: »

I'd be inclined to take the Irish test rather than substitute, [...]

Can I ask why? Is that legal? And, if I were to use that new Irish licence for insurance purposes, wouldn't I then be (correctly) assessed as somebody who only recently passed the test?

MadsL

hognef wrote: »

Can I ask why? Is that legal? And, if I were to use that new Irish licence for insurance purposes, wouldn't I then be (correctly) assessed as somebody who only recently passed the test?

Legal? You pass the competency test for the nation in which your are seeking insurance. I'm not sure why you would have to declare previous driving experience to the ins company.

You could check the rate against what you are currently paying, it would not surprise me if some insurance co. add heaving loadings onto non-Irish licences.
So I just did a makey-up quote with 123.ie

Identical details, 3 years no claims, 3 years resident in Ireland.

Irish licence held for 3 years = €586
EU licence held for 3 years = €1,260 :eek:

A 215% loading!!!

What is astonishing is that passing the Irish test and holding an Irish licence for only one year brings the quote back to €586, now if you were thinking of exchanging the licence, these sneaky feckers have a question which ask "Test passed in Ireland/UK" which if you answer NO, bounces the quote back to €1260.

Which answers the question - yes, do your test.

This is utterly reprehensible behaviour in my view however..a 215% loading.

Disgraceful.

MadsL

Just to be fair, I also took a quote from Liberty.

3 years Irish driving experience*, 3 year held Irish licence, 3 year no claims.
€743.61

3 years Irish driving experience, 3 year held EU licence, 3 year no claims.
€836.57

A 12.5% loading.


*Liberty used to ask residency, now are asking more correctly about experience.

hognef

MadsL wrote: »

Legal? You pass the competency test for the nation in which your are seeking insurance.

Unfortunately, it looks like it is indeed illegal to hold multiple (EEA) licences: (Article 7, paragraph 5) http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Consultations/Directive.pdf

Identical details, 3 years no claims, 3 years resident in Ireland.

Irish licence held for 3 years = €586
EU licence held for 3 years = €1,260 :eek:

A 215% loading!!!

Exactly what I just discovered.

What is astonishing is that passing the Irish test and holding an Irish licence for only one year brings the quote back to €586, now if you were thinking of exchanging the licence, these sneaky feckers have a question which ask "Test passed in Ireland/UK" which if you answer NO, bounces the quote back to €1260.

[...]

This is utterly reprehensible behaviour in my view however..a 215% loading.

Disgraceful.

The question of "Test passed in Ireland/UK" must be pretty close to discrimination based on nationality, as the vast majority of people will have passed the test in their native country.

rocky

MadsL wrote: »

Legal? You pass the competency test for the nation in which your are seeking insurance. I'm not sure why you would have to declare previous driving experience to the ins company.

You could check the rate against what you are currently paying, it would not surprise me if some insurance co. add heaving loadings onto non-Irish licences.
So I just did a makey-up quote with 123.ie

Identical details, 3 years no claims, 3 years resident in Ireland.

Irish licence held for 3 years = €586
EU licence held for 3 years = €1,260 :eek:

A 215% loading!!!

What is astonishing is that passing the Irish test and holding an Irish licence for only one year brings the quote back to €586, now if you were thinking of exchanging the licence, these sneaky feckers have a question which ask "Test passed in Ireland/UK" which if you answer NO, bounces the quote back to €1260.

Which answers the question - yes, do your test.

This is utterly reprehensible behaviour in my view however..a 215% loading.

Disgraceful.

I'm with 123.ie and pay under 500 on a 3 liter 5 series petrol, 3 years NCB and EU license exchanged for Irish a few years ago.

Not too bad..

MadsL

hognef wrote: »

Unfortunately, it looks like it is indeed illegal to hold multiple (EEA) licences: (Article 7, paragraph 5) http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Consultations/Directive.pdf

5. (a) No person may hold more than one driving licence;
(b) A Member State shall refuse to issue a licence where it
establishes that the applicant already holds a driving
licence

However:

Holders of licences issued by an EU/EEA member state

If you have a driving licence issued by an EU/EEA member state you can drive in Ireland as long as your existing licence is valid. If you wish to exchange your driving licence for an equivalent Irish driving licence, you must do so within 10 years of your driving licence expiring.

http://www.rsa.ie/en/RSA/Licensed-Drivers/Driving-licence/Holders-of-foreign-licenses/

If that is the case then I think we need some clarity from the Govt as to if insurance companies may discriminate against exchanged licences.

Clearly a 215% loading is entirely over the top, even if we allow the notion of increased insurance risk.

The question of "Test passed in Ireland/UK" must be pretty close to discrimination based on nationality, as the vast majority of people will have passed the test in their native country.

I think that this possibly needs to be referred back to the Data Protection commissioner as to its relevance in gaining an insurance quote. Its function seems to be to identify exchanged licences by EU nationals.

This would seem to be in breach of DIRECTIVE 2004/38/EC Article 24 with regard to the equal treatment of EU nationals.

1. Subject to such specific provisions as are expressly provided for in the Treaty and secondary law, all Union citizens residing on the basis of this Directive in the territory of the host Member State shall enjoy equal treatment with the nationals of that Member State within the scope of the Treaty.

Whilst this apply to Govt services the principle carries through into:
Directive 2003/109/EC

Article 11
Equal treatment
1. Long-term residents shall enjoy equal treatment with nationals as regards:
(f) access to goods and services and the supply of goods and services made available to the public and to procedures for obtaining housing;

...


Ah dammit.

CNS 2001/0074
This act shall not apply to the United Kingdom
This act shall not apply to Ireland
This act shall not apply to Denmark

Pesky non-Schengen opt out...thought that was a slam dunk.

STATUTORY INSTRUMENT S.I. No. 226 of 2006 transposed much of the directive into Irish Law but failed to ratify the provision on equal access to goods and services.

We also have Council Directive 2003/109/EC Article 12

(12) In order to constitute a genuine instrument for the integration of long-term residents into society in which they live, long-term residents should enjoy equality of treatment with citizens of the Member State in a wide range of economic and social matters, under the relevant conditions defined by this Directive.

Again...:mad:

CNS 2001/0074
This act shall not apply to the United Kingdom
This act shall not apply to Ireland
This act shall not apply to Denmark

Alright, let's try the Lisbon Treaty:

With the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union became legally binding. Furthermore, the Lisbon Treaty provides for EU accession to the European Convention on Human Rights.

http://eu2013.ie/media/eupresidency/content/documents/FRA-CASE-LAW-HANDBOOK_EN.pdf

Under the non-discrimination directives, the scope of the prohibition on discrimination extends to three areas: employment, the welfare system, and goods and services. Currently, the Racial Equality Directive applies to all three areas.

So...racial equality directive 2000/43, transposed into Irish Law as The Equal Status Acts 2000 to 2004 prohibits discrimination in the provision of goods and services, the disposal of property and access to education, on any of the nine grounds of gender, marital status, family status, age, sexual orientation, disability, race, religion and membership of the Traveller
community.

The Act outlaws discrimination in all services that are generally available to the public, whether provided by the state or by the private sector. These include facilities for refreshment, entertainment, banking, insurance, grants credit facilities, transport and travel services.

Except the opt out for the insurance industry is that:

Equal Status Act 2000, as follows:

“(1) A person shall not discriminate in disposing of goods to the public
generally or a section of the public or in providing a service, whether
the disposal or provision is for consideration or otherwise and whether
the service provided can be availed of only by a section of the public.
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply in respect of—
...
(d) differences in the treatment of persons in relation to annuities,
pensions, insurance policies or any other matters related to the
assessment of risk where the treatment—
(i) is effected by reference to—
(I) actuarial or statistical data obtained from a source on
which it is reasonable to rely, or
(II) other relevant underwriting or commercial factors,
and
(ii) is reasonable having regard to the data or other relevant
factors,"

So we have a rather woolly definition that allows insurance companies to claim that they have actuarial or statistical data to justify discrimination. It is interesting that when insurance companies are brought to court this "actuarial or statistical data" becomes somewhat unreliable.

Ross v Royal and Sun Alliance a case brought on the basis of age discrimination by a 71 year old found that:

The respondents were required to show that the difference in treatment was “effected by reference to actuarial or statistical data” which was “obtained from a source on which it is reasonable to rely” and “is reasonable having regard to the data or other relevant factors.” Alternatively, the respondent could demonstrate that the decision is “effected by reference to other relevant underwriting or commercial factors” and “is reasonable having regard to the data or other relevant factors.”

With regard to the first test, the source and integrity of the statistical data
used to justify the respondent’s policy had been called into question, as some
figures were no longer available and there were gaps and inconsistent results
in the data.

In respect of the second test, the respondent identified several underwriting
and commercial factors which influenced their policy; namely the older age
profile of the company’s customers compared to other insurers, their small
share of the motor insurance market, and the need to average out risks.
The Equality Officer pointed out that there were other relevant commercial
and underwriting factors relevant to assessing a person’s suitability for
insurance; their health, driving experience, previous claims history, and the
condition and age of the car, as well as the obligation of insurance
companies under the Declined Cases Agreement not to refuse quotes on the
ground of the age of the driver alone.

The “across the board” policy of the respondent failed to have regard to these relevant factors, or to address the individuality of a request for a quotation. While there was substance in the respondent’s claim that a large increase in exposure to the over-70’s market could be damaging for its business, there was no evidence to support the view that there was a large market of “floating” over-70’s customers seeking insurance.

The Equality Officer held that while proportionately higher premiums to older drivers may be acceptable, based on risk assessment, a complete refusal of a quotation based solely on a person’s age was unlawful discrimination.”

A significant test case however is the European Court of Justice (ECJ) decision on gender discrimination.

In delivering its judgement, the ECJ emphasised the principle of equal treatment between men and women in the access to supply of goods and services. The ECJ took the view that this principle applies equally to both men and women because they are comparable, and should therefore be treated as such for the purposes of insurance.

http://www.ofmdfmni.gov.uk/consultation-gender-risk-factor-for-insurance-summary-report.pdf

The full text of the judgement makes interesting reading and affirms over and over the principles of equality enshrined in European law.

The next step with this I guess is a referral back to the Data Protection Commissioner as to the legality of the "Test Passed in Ireland/UK" question and resultant loading. Is it even possible to do an Irish test anywhere else in the world???

And also a referral to the Equality Authority on the basis that the question clearly creates a Ireland/UK licence holder, and Other EU holder category that is discriminatory on the basis of nationality or other social grouping.

If anyone has a test case that they would be willing to include in a complaint I would be interested in talking to them. The test case can be constructed by simply obtaining a quote.

MadsL

rocky wrote: »

I'm with 123.ie and pay under 500 on a 3 liter 5 series petrol, 3 years NCB and EU license exchanged for Irish a few years ago.

Not too bad..

Go get a quote with your EU license exchanged just a year ago and see what happens.

As EU licences are valid until expiry, you could be resident 5 years and have just exchanged yesterday - in which case your quote rockets.

Duckjob

Re the OP, I'm sure the ins companies can point to statistics to demonstrate that people who up to fairly recently drove on the other side of the road in sometimes vastly different driving environments are involved in a higher percentage of accidents until they adjust to UK driving culture.

MadsL

Duckjob wrote: »

Re the OP, I'm sure the ins companies can point to statistics to demonstrate that people who up to fairly recently drove on the other side of the road in sometimes vastly different driving environments are involved in a higher percentage of accidents until they adjust to UK driving culture.

Would you be sure such statistics exist? Could you point me to a reliable source for them please?

Vastly different? As someone who has driven through much of Europe there isn't much that is 'vastly different' about the driving conditions - which EU country did you have in mind?

Now, if you read the example of the 215% loading carefully, do you think such statistics exist to differentiate the accident rate of those who have exchanged licences rather than passed a test in the UK/Ireland yet have the same level of driving experience in Ireland. I very very much doubt such granular statistics exist, and if they do, are in such tiny sample size as to be meaningless.

stoneill

Jasus - Insurance is expensive in the UK!

MadsL

I just received a note from the Data Protection Commissioners office that the question relating to residency will be removed within the next month from the 123 website based on a commitment from Royal Sun.

This means, as far as I am aware that there are no longer any insurance companies in a position to discriminate against returning emigrants or against immigrants based on their residency history and that all decisions/loading should be made based on driving experience not geographical residency.

If you do find one who decides to reinstate such questions I would appreciate a PM. Thanks.