Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Women drivers

81 replies

Booandpops · 01/03/2011 23:19

Bit pissed at the fact car insurance will now be universal - no discounts for women drivers. I know that
some women will cause accidents and some men will but it feels like women are being fleeced from every corner at the moment. Child benefits going. sure start centres. Now higher insurance. You can bet they won't brings mens costs down or put women's wages up.

OP posts:
squeakytoy · 01/03/2011 23:21

Be interesting to hear the feminist view on this one Grin

worraliberty · 01/03/2011 23:21

Whilst I agree that the wrong decision was made about the car insurance...how is Child benefits 'going' and Sure start centres fleecing women in particular? Confused

huddspur · 01/03/2011 23:33

This is really good news as it means that mens and womens pension annuity will have to be equalised. Car Insurance premiums are insignificant in comparison so I wouldn't worry.

Original poster
Booandpops · 01/03/2011 23:35

Because I work part time (earning 10k) but my dh is just Above the child benefit threshold so we will lose it Thats over 2k of my income gone
And when the sure starts go all my low cost ( indoor) entertainment go e too My dh money is tied up in the house and bills/petrol food etc etc so my child benefit was my only bit of cash for the kids Very grumpy

OP posts:
Bilin · 01/03/2011 23:35

It was unfair for men to be paying higher insurance premium than women on the basis of gender. This is clearly discrimination. Insurance premium should be individualised.

worraliberty · 01/03/2011 23:37

Yes but that doesn't mean women are being fleeced as such. CB and Surestart are available to Dads too.

worraliberty · 01/03/2011 23:38

It wasn't on the basis of gender as such Bilin it's an undisputible fact that women make safer drivers.

squeakytoy · 01/03/2011 23:40

Insurance premiums are all about risk and statistics. Statistically young male drivers ARE a higher risk than females. So really, it is a ridiculous ruling.

vicbar · 01/03/2011 23:40

It may be based on sex but the sex is only part of an insurance prem. Insurance is an 'on risk' product so what should it be based on ?? If women (in general) have fewer accidents why should they pay more ? What next OAP's having to pay the same as teenagers as it's sexist ? BTW Im on my DH's policy so the change doesnt affect me directly but it does seem a rather silly change.

Bilin · 01/03/2011 23:46

That is why it should be individualised. There are men that drives better than women.

JaneS · 01/03/2011 23:47

Oh thank god, does that mean they'll have to get rid of that incredibly irritating Shiela's Wheels advert?

That alone is good enough for me! Grin

manticlimactic · 01/03/2011 23:57

Sheilas Wheels isn't even that cheap!Shock

There was a bloke on the radio this morning on about the insurance thing and said it's not about gender, it's about less risk. Women statistically have fewer accidents and low speed impact bumps.

If the insurance companies are discriminating and not going by statistics then surely the EU should look into the way over 50's have favourable insurance as they are statistically a lower risk too. But surely that discriminates against the young?

squeakytoy · 02/03/2011 00:20

Dragon. it will probably mean an increase in the irritating Go Compare ads.. which can never be a good thing... Hmm

BaggedandTagged · 02/03/2011 00:27

It's a really stupid ruling as it undermines the whole basis of the acturial calculation.

Billin- they do individualise to the extent possible (using data such as age, gender, occupation, location, miles per year, car use purpose, previous history etc) but they don't know you personally do they?

This ruling just skews the acturial calculations by taking out one contributory factor.

cat64 · 02/03/2011 00:33

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

PepsiPopcorn · 02/03/2011 00:36

Equality works both ways so I don't have a problem with this change.

It's quite possible that insurers could find statistics relating to a number of different groups of people too, but the point is they don't, and shouldn't, because of discrimination.

cat64 · 02/03/2011 00:46

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

PepsiPopcorn · 02/03/2011 00:52

"but it's not discrimination - it's assessing the risk, and charging for the policy accordingly"

So would you also be happy for policies where you paid more/less if you were of a certain race, or were of a particular sexual orientation, because of statistical "risks" linked to these groups?

ScaredOne · 02/03/2011 00:55

But don't young drivers pay more too? At least from my experience. So is that discrimination too?

Saltatrix · 02/03/2011 00:57

Age is not really considered because it changes therefore everyone will both benefit and lose out at some point.

piprabbit · 02/03/2011 00:59

The sad thing is that, although I am certain my car and life insurance costs will increase so that I pay the same as a man, I am equally sure that nobody is going to reduce my annuity costs come retirement - I'll find that they've just increased what men are paying to bring it into line with women.

100% definite the insurance companies won't be losing out.

ScaredOne · 02/03/2011 01:00

Ah ok, I don't actually have a car in the UK. But whenever I want to use my mother's car in germany she has to pay extra because I am under 25. Same thing in the US. When living there my car insurance was ridiculously high due to me (back then) not even being 21. So I thought that would be the case here too, sorry.

Crossedarms · 02/03/2011 01:10

Note

HHLimbo · 02/03/2011 01:21

So for insurance companies, sexism bad, ageism good.

AyeRobot · 02/03/2011 01:29

Ironic that the case was brought by a Consumer Action group when the result will be a gain for the insurers.