All’s fair in love and car insurance (From Bucks Free Press)
Send your news, photos and videos by texting bucksfreepress to 80360 or email
The perfect wife and mother, Rebecca runs a home, a village magazine and is working on her novel. She does not visit the gym or jog but is in amazingly good shape. She enjoys photography, playing the piano and arguing with the TV. She lives in Amersham with her husband and youngest child (aged nine). Her eldest, now 26, lives and works in Buckinghamshire.
Women drivers
5:39pm Thursday 31st March 2011
As a woman, I’m statistically less prone to have expensive accidents than a man. It seems to be gender-specific unfortunately.
I’m also more likely to have cervical cancer, breast cancer, be more upset when I crack a nail and like shoes more than fast cars.
But in an attempt to be non-sexist, the European Court of Justice has said I’ll have to pay the same insurance premium as a man. Because that’s what’s fair.
And life must be fair.
So will house insurance soon be the same all across the board no matter where we live? Because otherwise it’s unfair for people living in high crime areas.
In relatively safe Amersham, will I soon have to pay similar premiums to someone with a house in Islington? Who has no window locks, doesn’t live in a Neighbourhood Watch area and has been burgled before. Otherwise it’s showing a financial bias towards those in more rural areas? A sort of bumpkin bonus?
And will barbers have to bump up their prices to show equality between the sexes in the haircut arena? How far is this to go?
I do resent this and see it only as a way of squeezing more money out of people.
Insurance is based on facts. Men cost insurers more because … well … they drive differently and cost insurers more.
And why should it be that women’s premiums rise because it has been unfair on men? Shouldn’t men’s premiums be lowered?
I’m not a hard-line feminist and like the differences between men and women. I believe we are good at different things and laws, policies, new regulations and the like won’t eliminate those differences. Maybe just make some feel a bit better.
I’m worried that this insanity might extend to the accumulation of NCDs and the increasingly lower premiums currently enjoyed by older, safer, more experienced drivers. Is that ageist?
After all, the young can’t help being young…
Readers who submit articles must agree to our terms of use. The content is the sole responsibility of the contributor and is unmoderated. But we will react if anything that breaks the rules comes to our attention. If you wish to complain about this article, contact us here
Readers who submit articles must agree to our terms of use. The content is the sole responsibility of the contributor and is unmoderated. But we will react if anything that breaks the rules comes to our attention. If you wish to complain about this article, contact us here
Comments(8)
NicM
says...
7:45pm Thu 31 Mar 11
The proposals will also put up the price of men's pensions as the new rules will mean that the insurance companies will have to assume that they live as long as we do.
It makes a mockery of insurance being based on risk. I think it is truly likely that oldies like me will be facing the same premiums as youngsters as it would be 'ageist' if we didn't!
J B Blackett
says...
8:16pm Thu 31 Mar 11
.
And as per usual our wonderful politicians and their fellow travelers in out-of-touch institutions (in this particular case anti-democratic dogmatic ones) are Wrong. And no proof or reasonable justification for their illogical actions.
.
Yet again.
tom.marlow
says...
9:05pm Thu 31 Mar 11
.
It will be interesting to see how the insurance industry responds to this.
.
I've always said that you don't solve problems by legislating, but I dont even think there is a problem here.
.
What are they actually trying to achieve? By basing premiums on objective actuarial risk calculations and given that the motor insurance market is very liquid and all participants have access to the same information, the people writing motor insurance is about as non-discriminatory as you can get. There is little scope for basing premiums on anything other than risk
.
Same goes for annuities. There are some very good reasons why these are a rubbish way of implementing a pension scheme but gender discrimination is not one of them.
Rebecca Leon
says...
9:22am Fri 1 Apr 11
:
Got stuck in a technological tangle of 'internal error' script and even borrowed Ivor's space to make my misery heard... Needs must.
Tharus Bond
says...
12:52pm Fri 1 Apr 11
some are down to experience and some aren't.
I wonder do cyclists have insuraunce to use the road?
what happens when they cause damage to your vehicle?
Rebecca Leon
says...
4:05pm Sat 2 Apr 11
Focus89
says...
4:24pm Sat 16 Apr 11
I am a young driver and i hate being associated as an inexperienced driver.
I do alot of mileage and I have done a driver improvement course and i am a better driver than most on the road.
Still i am peanalised as a young driver, so much so that i may have to sell my car and get a buss pass because i cant afford silly insurance premiums anymore.
I pay just under £120 a month and only use the car for work and back, it really is ridiculous as when i passed my test it was only £60 on a 1.8 petrol golf!!
Fuel and Insurance is ridiculous, Alot of people are at the point like me of thinking about selling their cars.
Latest Blog entries
The perfect wife and mother, Rebecca runs a home, a bad temper and is working on her novel. She enjoys photography, playing the piano and likes almost anything that's out of fashion and uncool. She lives in Amersham with her husband and youngest child (aged ten). Her eldest, now 27, lives and works in Buckinghamshire.
demoness says...
7:14pm Thu 31 Mar 11
I agree with you but be prepared for a backlash of indignant male drivers who will insist we cannot drive for toffee and shoul d be banned... :))