Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Gender based discrimination on car insurance now illegal!

245678

Comments

  • #32
    up for anything
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,791 ✭✭✭up for anything


    pickarooney wrote: »
    I'm looking forward to hearing from men cheering the fact they'll now be paying more towards their wives' insurance premiums.

    Like insurance it must be an age thing. :D
    yawnstretch wrote: »
    Women want it every bloody way and I've had enough.

    Well that's the last time I ask you to try a different position! You're not great in bed anyhow. :p


  • #33
    HellFireClub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,911 ✭✭✭HellFireClub


    European judges rewrote the rule book for insurance companies today by banning risk assessment based on gender.

    Using differences between men and women as a risk factor in setting premiums for car and medical insurance and pension schemes breaches EU rules on equality, declared the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg.

    The verdict – which applies from December 21, 2012 – will force changes in the current standard practice across Europe of basing insurance rates on statistics about differing life expectancies or road accident records of the sexes.

    It was immediately condemned as “utter madness” and a “setback for common sense” by Conservative MEP Sajjad Karim.

    The Association of British Insurers estimates that the decision will actually reinforce price discrimination, with women drivers under 26 in Ireland facing a 25% rise in car insurance rates, with a 10% drop in rates for fall for men.

    Until now, discrimination in setting insurance rates has been explicitly permitted under EU equal treatment rules, “if sex is a determining risk factor... substantiated by relevant and accurate actuarial and statistical data”.

    But today the judges followed advice from the court’s Advocate-General that “higher-ranking” equality provisions set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Lisbon Treaty must now apply.

    Insurance companies can carry on discriminating between the sexes until December next year – the time when current EU equality rules are due to be reviewed.

    The delay will also give insurance companies and risk assessors time to change the template for risk assessment by ignoring traditional statistical gender-based evidence.

    Read more: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/womens-lower-insurance-premiums-ruled-unfair-495535.html#ixzz1FL5latxF


  • #34
    Run_to_da_hills
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    folan wrote: »
    If true, this points to bad news for women drivers, who are about to see premiums go up.
    Bad news to everyone.

    The fcukers will only pass on their loss across the board. :mad:

    Any excuse to bump up premiums.


  • #35
    HellFireClub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,911 ✭✭✭HellFireClub


    I take it that it's not a good day for those behind the desk at Sheila's Wheels! :D:D:D:D


  • #36
    Jimmy the Wheel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 220 ✭✭Jimmy the Wheel


    It doesn't make a lot of sense.

    If women as a group crash less, they should pay less for their insurance.

    It just sounds like a case of the European courts going a bit PC.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    HellFireClub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,911 ✭✭✭HellFireClub


    Jimmy the Wheel wrote: »
    It doesn't make a lot of sense.

    If women as a group crash less, they should pay less for their insurance.

    It just sounds like a case of the European courts going a bit PC.

    And what if they are statisically more likely to get pregnant more than men, should they not pay higher health insurance???


  • #38
    Jagle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 870 ✭✭✭Jagle


    HellFireClub wrote: »
    And what if they are statisically more likely to get pregnant more than men, should they not pay higher health insurance???

    very good point


  • #39
    Jimmy the Wheel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 220 ✭✭Jimmy the Wheel


    HellFireClub wrote: »
    And what if they are statisically more likely to get pregnant more than men, should they not pay higher health insurance???

    Straw man. Forget about that one.

    If you're a man aged 18 to 24 or whatever it is, you're more likely to crash. Therefore you pay more insurance.

    If you live in a certain area, your car is more likely to be robbed. You pay more insurance.

    If it can be statistically proven that women crash less than men, n whatever age group, then why shouldn't they pay less insurance?


  • #40
    pickarooney
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 36,496 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    Jimmy the Wheel wrote: »
    If you're a man aged 18 to 24 or whatever it is, you're more likely to crash. Therefore you pay more insurance.

    Not if you drive sensibly :confused:


  • #41
    Jagle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 870 ✭✭✭Jagle


    have you been a young male looking for insurance on a car? absolutely crazy prices while women get away with insanely low costs, its crazy because gender isnt a factor in crashes, i dont care what statistics they throw at you to justify the costs
    Jimmy the Wheel wrote: »
    Straw man. Forget about that one.

    If you're a man aged 18 to 24 or whatever it is, you're more likely to crash. Therefore you pay more insurance.

    If you live in a certain area, your car is more likely to be robbed. You pay more insurance.

    If it can be statistically proven that women crash less than men, n whatever age group, then why shouldn't they pay less insurance?


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    HellFireClub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,911 ✭✭✭HellFireClub


    Jimmy the Wheel wrote: »
    Straw man. Forget about that one.

    If you're a man aged 18 to 24 or whatever it is, you're more likely to crash. Therefore you pay more insurance.

    If you live in a certain area, your car is more likely to be robbed. You pay more insurance.

    If it can be statistically proven that women crash less than men, n whatever age group, then why shouldn't they pay less insurance?

    It can be statistically assumed, never mind proven, that women get pregnant more than men, so as per you're logic above, why do they not pay more in health insurance to be covered for medical procedures that clearly will never be required for males???


  • #43
    Jimmy the Wheel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 220 ✭✭Jimmy the Wheel


    pickarooney wrote: »
    Not if you drive sensibly :confused:

    To difficult to actuariate, or whatever the word may be, the care that individual drivers might take.


  • #44
    Run_to_da_hills
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    Woman drivers can now thank those that voted yes for Lisbon for this. :p


  • #45
    Jimmy the Wheel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 220 ✭✭Jimmy the Wheel


    HellFireClub wrote: »
    It can be statistically assumed, never mind proven, that women get pregnant more than men, so as per you're logic above, why do they not pay more in health insurance to be covered for medical procedures that clearly will never be required for males???

    Have your straw man argument with someone else. Thanks.


  • #46
    TwoShedsJackson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,438 ✭✭✭TwoShedsJackson


    HellFireClub wrote: »
    And what if they are statisically more likely to get pregnant more than men, should they not pay higher health insurance???

    Women do pay higher health insurance generally, as they have a longer life expectancy.


  • #47
    sophia25
    Closed Accounts Posts: 265 ✭✭sophia25


    HellFireClub wrote: »
    And what if they are statisically more likely to get pregnant more than men, should they not pay higher health insurance???

    I was actually waiting for someone to say something as ridiculous as that. So firstly maternity cover should be seen as the right of every human being to be delivered safely and provided with the right care, male babies are equally as dependent on this as females. And secondly......... statistically a male sperm and a female egg are responsible for each pregnancy!


  • #48
    HellFireClub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,911 ✭✭✭HellFireClub


    Jesus I remember quotes of 6K-8K when I started driving in my early 20's, on the FALSE assumption that I was an unsafe driver. Do you think I've any hope of a refund now, years later when I've never been involved in an accident??? And my insurance is still higher than a woman of comparable age, after nearly 20 years of safe driving, boll*x is the only word for it...


  • #49
    Squirm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 170 ✭✭Squirm


    I don't see as being remotely discriminatory to investigate who is more likely to be in an accident and set premiums accordingly. Men are more likely to cause an accident, so they pay more. Drive safer- pay less. Women will still benefit from their no-claims bonus' and the fact that they generally have longer periods claim free, but it is ridiculous to suggest that it is sexist in some way to charge a person less if they're less likely to crash......is that not what actuaries are for?! It's not like a group on man-hating feminists set the trend! A lot of men out there are on their partner's insurance as a named driver, to save money... this will effect many more people than the 'women putting their make-up on on their way to work'.

    Re; women paying more for health insurance. Pregnancy care is only one aspect of health insurance. Men are more likely to make a health insurance claim also. Due to personal injury, sports injury and due to illness. Men generally demonsrate a poorer state of health as they age also. So it more than negates prenatal care warranting higher health insurance premiums for women.


  • #50
    NTMK
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,575 ✭✭✭NTMK


    Jimmy the Wheel wrote: »
    Straw man. Forget about that one.

    If you're a man aged 18 to 24 or whatever it is, you're more likely to crash. Therefore you pay more insurance.

    If it can be statistically proven that women crash less than men, n whatever age group, then why shouldn't they pay less insurance?

    I know more girls that have crashed than lads

    i'm 21 ive never crashed because i dont drive like an idiot so why should i have to pay nearly €800 more than a girl the same age as me


  • #51
    Jagle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 870 ✭✭✭Jagle


    way to avoid debate because someone had a valid point to make
    Jimmy the Wheel wrote: »
    Have your straw man argument with someone else. Thanks.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    HellFireClub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,911 ✭✭✭HellFireClub


    sophia25 wrote: »
    I was actually waiting for someone to say something as ridiculous as that. So firstly maternity cover should be seen as the right of every human being to be delivered safely and provided with the right care, male babies are equally as dependent on this as females. And secondly......... statistically a male sperm and a female egg are responsible for each pregnancy!

    What's ridiculous is that in the year 2011, we tolerate discrimination. Men can't bear children, but according to the poster above, we should be burdened with the medical cost of childbirth for a woman. I'm a man and I have no children, why should I pay through my medical insurance for the delivery of someone else's fu*king sprog?!?

    As I believe in equality, I have no issue with it, but it's poking me in the eye to ask that of me and then tell me that I'm having a saddle put on me for car insurance when there is no evidence over a 20 year period that I am any less safe a driver or any higher a risk than a woman of comparable age.


  • #53
    Jimmy the Wheel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 220 ✭✭Jimmy the Wheel


    Jagle wrote: »
    way to avoid debate because someone had a valid point to make

    It would be a valid point in a debate about health insurance, not car insurance.


  • #54
    bonerm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,594 ✭✭✭bonerm


    I love how middle-class white males get all uppity because one of lifes deck-of-cards is actually stacked against them.


  • #55
    Jagle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 870 ✭✭✭Jagle


    bonerm wrote: »
    I love how middle-class white males get all uppity because one of lifes deck-of-cards is actually stacked against them.

    because after 4 years of driving, not one accident to speak of my insurance is still higher then a woman starting out with no experience,
    someone explain please cos that is bullsh1t


  • #56
    HellFireClub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,911 ✭✭✭HellFireClub


    Squirm wrote: »
    I don't see as being remotely discriminatory to investigate who is more likely to be in an accident and set premiums accordingly. Men are more likely to cause an accident, so they pay more. Drive safer- pay less. Women will still benefit from their no-claims bonus' and the fact that they generally have longer periods claim free, but it is ridiculous to suggest that it is sexist in some way to charge a person less if they're less likely to crash......is that not what actuaries are for?! It's not like a group on man-hating feminists set the trend! A lot of men out there are on their partner's insurance as a named driver, to save money... this will effect many more people than the 'women putting their make-up on on their way to work'.

    Not true, if you are a male with 15 years driving experience, you are paying more for that insurance than a woman with the same driving experience and record as you, that is boll*x in my opinion.


  • #57
    Chase Helpful Transportation
    Posts: 81,308 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Chase Helpful Transportation


    Great, next they'll have male and female annuity rates the same :rolleyes:


  • #58
    Squirm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 170 ✭✭Squirm


    HellFireClub wrote: »
    Jesus I remember quotes of 6K-8K when I started driving in my early 20's, on the FALSE assumption that I was an unsafe driver. Do you think I've any hope of a refund now, years later when I've never been involved in an accident??? And my insurance is still higher than a woman of comparable age, after nearly 20 years of safe driving, boll*x is the only word for it...


    So should insurance companies start charging based on each, very personal, set of circumstances? Or how do you suggest premiums be set?There is a reason why actuarial finance is so difficult to qualify in and so highly paid.

    What is the case in your situation doesn't represent the over-riding trend, unfortunately for you. I have less of no claims bonus than my partner and subsequently am quoted considerably more for insurance. Give me another 5-9yrs and that will change, but I have certainly not seen my premiums be set lower based soley on my gender. And rightly so.


  • #59
    Buceph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,059 ✭✭✭Buceph


    Squirm wrote: »
    Men are more likely to cause an accident, so they pay more.

    No-one knows if men are more likely to cause an accident. That would be virtually impossible to tally. What is known is that men are more likely to have their insurance claimed off of.

    Anecdotally, I've talked to a couple of insurance company actuaries and people involved in the industry and they've told me that women and the elderly are actually more likely to be the cause, as far as they can tell, but less likely to be directly involved in the crash, so don't have as many claims against their insurance. But as no-one can say definitively who is the cause in most insurance claims, it comes down to who is most to blame of those left.


  • #60
    sophia25
    Closed Accounts Posts: 265 ✭✭sophia25


    HellFireClub wrote: »
    What's ridiculous is that in the year 2011, we tolerate discrimination. Men can't bear children, but according to the poster above, we should be burdened with the medical cost of childbirth for a woman. I'm a man and I have no children, why should I pay through my medical insurance for the delivery of someone else's fu*king sprog?!?

    As I said it should be the right of every child born to the best prenatal care available and a safe delivery. It is not some extra benefit for women, ask any Mother after labour!! You apparently were afforded a safe delivery, but perhaps the next generation of "sprogs" shouldn't. Oh, but without them, who will nurse you in your old age............:rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,030 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    TwoShedsJackson wrote: »
    Women do pay higher health insurance generally, as they have a longer life expectancy.

    You pay for insurance on a yearly basis. Comparing year to year, a women should pay a much higher premium due to the much larger risk. This currently doesn't happen. Luckily, equality for genders is coming to Car insurance.


Advertisement
Advertisement