You might wonder why the govt don't see sense over this issue.
tinyurl.com/cphuvf
One answer- Insurance Premium Tax. Levied at 5% on the premium paid, any wonder that the higher the motor insurance premium we pay, the happier they are.
Age has to be a factor in assessing a risk in these circumstances.
|
I knew the one I agreed with had to be a fluke. Now Mr Cul-de-Sac's at it again, posting links to scare stories in that newspaper (whose true journalistic value is amply illustrated by the column of picture links on the right hand side) and, having credulously swallowed the lot himself, expecting us to do the same. Yes, yes, it's an outrage. Will it happen? Will we all simply be able to buy a one-rate-fits-all insurance stamp from a machine outside the post office? No.
Now wipe away the froth and go and bother someone else.
|
|
Do you have any good reason why a driver such as myself with a no claims standing of over 20 years should pay more so as that the 17 year old Chavs in their souped up Novas can pile six of their mates in to it and drive like pratts with me helping to keep their insurance affordable ?
|
The Daily Wail was wittering on about this years ago, more about sex discrimination coming in.
Nothing ever happened - mush like most of their other scare stories.
|
The Government is 2 years away from an election they may well lose - this kind of carp isn't going to see the light of day.
What would be next - annuities not being allowed to take the age of the purchaser into account? Sweet! I'll be retiring at 40 then!
|
There's quite a cogent explanation here on a site I've found reliable before:
www.out-law.com/page-9291
It might not hold the attention of a Mail reader, though, because it's rather long and doesn't mention immigration at all. So here's the key passage:
On 2nd July 2008, the European Commission adopted a proposal for a new directive aimed at providing protection outside the workplace from discrimination on grounds of age, disability, sexual orientation and religion or belief.
The draft directive has a broad remit, covering the provision of social services, healthcare, education and housing as well as access to and the supply of goods and services, including insurance.
The proposal, however, includes a special rule for insurance and banking services in recognition of the fact that age or disability can be an essential element in the assessment of risk for certain products and, therefore, the price.
The draft rule provides "in the provision of financial services, member states may permit proportionate differences in treatment where, for the product in question, the use of age or disability is a key factor in the assessment of risk based on relevant and accurate actuarial or statistical data".
|
It might not hold the attention of a Mail reader,>>
Please do not insult the majority of Daily Mail readers...:-)
At least we are generally able to think clearly and work out solutions for ourselves.
For instance, I'm just delighted that I'm under 85 and over 17 to 21 years of age....:-))
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 03/03/2009 at 00:04
|
|
|
|
www.abi.org.uk/Newsreleases/viewNewsRelease.asp?nr...5
Unless the Equalities Bill is amended before it is Enacted, then yes, what MrX says is true.
www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmbills...l
Edited by Hamsafar on 02/03/2009 at 20:57
|
|
|
|
|
|
The government will exempt the Insurance industry as they can demonstrate that people under a certain age and over a certain age are more likely to have an accident.
However be warned that car insurance and to some extent home insurance premiums are likely to increase by between 5% and 10% due to the recession within the next 18 months
|
|
I all so expect to see an increase in Insurance Premium tax this budget to around 8% ( in line with inflation from then on ). This will impact quite heavily on motor policies. Please don't shoot me until I am proved wrong... then fire away.
|
I would agree with you Mr X, their are rumours every budget that the government will increase Insurance Premium Tax and taking into account the amount of debt they have got us into an increase in IPT would be right up their street as its an indirect tax.
The government have been "justifying" an increase in IPT for many years as most other countries in Europe have higher levels of Tax on Insurance so "Harmonising" us with Europe on Insurance Premium Tax is a great excuse
|
|
|
How can a percentile tax increase with inflation ?
That's an accelerator, not an inflationary increase.
As insurance costs go up, the tax take increases at the same rate given the same percentage being charged.
Any increase in a percentile tax is a tax hike, not an inflationary rise.
|
|
Mr X - change paper - (even better stop reading them altogether) and look forward to a life with sunshine.
|
I feel like biting - my hand off to stop typing - but the temptation is proving too much..
If it was a pet, the vet would have put it out of misery by now, and saved the backroom from a lot of grief.
The sad thing is, I feel sure that the same discussion can be had quite rationally and without any of the histrionics.
|
Jbif - I got mildly sarcastic on a previous thread and it got pulled - you post analogies with vets/animals and it's still here!!!
|
|
|
I see no histrionics. If it were not for newspapers, how would we come in to possession of such information ? Once again, I bring up the point that we are on a forum that is owned / operated by some one who writes for a newspaper and which carries a small advert for that paper. Surely if you believe all newspapers are nothing but scaremongers why join a forum associated with one ?I also find it interesting that some things will only be believed if they are carried in paper x,y or z but not a, b or c.
|
|
Funny, but when I read a newspaper feature on my own area of expertise, it's usually full of errors. Why would I believe without question everything I read on topics I have less knowledge of?
|
|
|
I also find it interesting that some things will only be believed if they are carried inpaper x y or z but not a b or c.
that ought to be obvious...some newspapers report more facts and have less slant than others
the one you're discussing might as well now be a red top....it prints sensationalist carp purely to sell the paper. I actually think it's amoral, because the journalists are usually at least reasonably educated, if not more so...so they know the score when they're putting pen to paper...yet they'll continue with their own angle knowing the truth lies elsewhere
...not very nice in my book
stop buying the thing and buy the Telegraph....not perfect i know, but considerably better than some
|
I did buy the Telegraph for 12 years up until this Christmas's holidays debacle when they slashed the supplements on the basis of ' holidays editions ' for nearly four weeks whilst still charging the same amount. They have also pruned a lot of the writers I enjoyed reading.
|
|
|
|
... I also find it interesting that some things will only be believed if they are carried in paper x,y or z but not a, b or c. >>
Don't take any notice. Paper a,b, or c is probably the most popular in terms of sales whereas x,y or z is more likely read by a minority - demographically such as the majority of this forum's membership.
Mr X - I think if you wan't to be taken seriously, you first need to take things less seriously. I suggest the following tactics:
Make some jokes, add some smilies, pull the moderator's leg now and again [make sure it is not Pologirl's leg, though, as you will be busted well and good as by all accounts she is a BIG girl who drives a Golf, not a Polo as her name misleads people in to thinking]. Then come in now and again with your serious stuff to awaken the backroom to the prospect of impending doom and gloom and brutality by the BIB. ;-) HTH.
Edited by jbif on 02/03/2009 at 22:17
|
"Once again, I bring up the point that we are on a forum that is owned / operated by some one who writes for a newspaper and which carries a small advert for that paper. Surely if you believe all newspapers are nothing but scaremongers why join a forum associated with one ?"
Yes, I've seen Mr X make this point before and thought it was pretty threadbare - indeed, so obviously threadbare it's hardly worth taking up.
I speak for myself, but I guess perhaps for other Back-Roomers, when I say that the reason I'm here is that I'm interested in cars and motoring in general, and in the views of others who are similarly inclined. I read far more than I post and try not to be too full of my own importance.
The fact that the Back Room is associated with a journalist is irrelevant to me.
I'm an agnostic - does that mean I'm not allowed to enjoy Christmas?
|
A true journalist will not be swayed or influenced by those who seek to gain from his or her work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
>>..to some extent home insurance premiums are likely to increase >>
I've just virtually halved my home and contents insurance cost with Churchill for the next 12 months merely by refusing to accept its renewal terms as gospel.
A trawl of the comparison websites revealed that Churchill was able to offer me a substantially lower rate - one quick free phone call asking what exactly was going on, brought an immediate offer to match the comparison website's price.
Saving amounted to £165 or even more if you accept the claim that the on-line premium figure was nearly £100 more before discounts than the official renewal demand.
|
Believe me the prices will start to increase, Insurance premium increase during a recession for many reasons such as the crime rate goes up, more fraudulent claims and more claims in general.
This recession will be worse than normal for Insurers as they only make a small percentage of their profits on your premium. Most companies make between 0% and 8% gross profit on your premium after paying claims. They make their money by investing the billions of pounds around many different markets. With interest rates at 1% and their investments in property dropping they will need to increase the rates to make up for it. In addition to this as the value of their liquid assests have reduced (They have to have certain amounts of "Cash" in the bank to cover their liabilities) they will not be able to cover as many drivers as their "Capacity" has reduced. As the over supply of capacity dries up the laws of supply and demand take over and this also has an effect on premiums.
They are predicting rises of up to 10% over the next 18 months.
P.S Churchill are owned by RBS as are Direct Line....
|
|
Dacouch-Mr X's alter ego!
|
|
|
|
|
"Big Insurance rises to come"
I'll believe it if and when it happens to me. There's no point in crossing a bridge until you get to it.
|
|
MrX - you were arguing in a previous thread about insurers refusing to cover musicians and other high risk occupations. Now you say that age must be a factor in assessing risk. (see your original post) Which way do you want it?
|
|
I don't believe in the stereo typing of occupations as a guide to risk but I do believe in it when it comes to age.
|
My first introduction to the publication referred to by the OP was a complimentary copy provided by an airline I flew with recently. The worst kind of fearmongering, "we're all going to die" nonsense it has ever been my misfortune to read. If I believed half the rot written in this one issue, I'd have come down with hypertension. And that would have probably been the EUs fault! Or immigrants!
Insurance companies are not going to lose the right to discriminate on age grounds, as it would make their entire business model completely unworkable. There are also statistics which categorically prove that age and disabilities are linked to risk. Such provision is clearly stated in the terms of the proposed regulations.
Cheers
DP
|
|
|
I don't believe in the stereo typing of occupations as a guide to risk but I do believe in it when it comes to age.
Utter tosh. The added experience and maturity of attitude which comes with age can far outweigh any reduction in physical attributes. You've only got to look at the "angry young man" syndrome of some young Backroomers to see what an excitable, irrational, and unpredictable lot they can be!
|
Friend of a friend's company does home repairs for Ins Cos - they have laid off some 30 staff out of 100+.
Downturn has meant less Ins claims - part of reason is people do not have the £150/£250 excess that they would pay so they do not claim for the damage!
Less claims - Ins Co makes more money / premiums may fall!
My car ins renewed last month - fell from £147 to £131- fully comp 2 ltr car - originally it went up £33 but the comparison site said it went down and they matched their own premium.
It pays to check!!
|
A down turn does not mean less claims it normally means more claims, Insurers are laying off claims staff as they are making savings by using technology or sending the jobs to India. One Insurers want to save money the first thing they do is cut claims staff as they do not generate income.
Whenever there is a recession the crime rate goes up so there are more crime claims for the Insurers to deal wth, the accident rate normally goes up slightly but Insurers tend to receive far more fraudulent claims and more injury claims.
|
|
|
|
I don't believe in the stereo typing of occupations as a guide to risk ..
I was going to offer the occupation of steeplejack as an example, but that might be irrelevant while driving. But if it is proven that 'musicians' as a group are higher-than-normal drug users, it would seem reasonable to classify them as high-risk drivers. Unfair to those who aren't dependent, but the age thing is unfair to some of us oldies who 'seem' less old than others. Rough with smooth, etc...
|
|
|
|
|
It will come, Insurance goes in cycles when the times are good and there are lots of Insurers competing for the business as we have had for the last decade we have a "Soft Market". When times are not good eg a recession or other factors influence the amount of Insurers competing for the business we have a "Hard Market"
When we had the last Hard Market my friend whose nightclub I insured saw his premiums rise from £12000 a year to £65000 as the ten companies that offered this type of cover all withdrew from the market as it was deemed to be high risk so they used the "Capacity" they had to take on lower risk customers in other areas but at high premiums. Only one company stayed covering nightclubs and that was QBE, they made hay while they could and eventually my friends premium reduced back down to the £12000 mark as the market softened again.
Insurers can only take on a certain amount of premium based on what their Liquid Assets are (Their Capacity). Its not based on how many customers they can accept but how much in premium they can accept so they tend to take on less customers at higher premiums when their capacity reduces.
Ask anyone in the Insurance market and they will know about the hard and soft markets and that it is expected (Not guaranteed but likely) that we will enter a hard market and prices will increase. The UK car and home insurance market is the most competitive in the world and prices are articifially low as companies compete for business and offer large discounts to try and obtain new customers.
Surely most of you can remember in the last recession when your premiums increased
I'm just trying to explain the situation so you are aware of what could happen.
www.cirmagazine.com/pages/stories/january09/underw...m
|
MrX - I was going to do a stupid sarcastic entry about 'stereo typing' and thought better of it on account of having to spell everything twice, or backwards or in mirror image.
Surely assessing risk on account of occupation is no different to assessing risk on any other basis? The insurers have learnt where the most likely risk comes from, albeit it may not apply in individual cases. Unfortunately the insurer wouldn't be able to conduct realistic business having to follow everyone to assess driving ability or lifestyle habits. Age is simply another risk factor.
|
|
|
|
|
