DUI penalties are a joke in NJ. A friend of mine was charged with DUI and then charged again with driving with a suspended license (a few days into his DUI suspension). Instead of doing what was in the best interest of public safety (i.e. putting a Denver boot on his car or repossessing it), the police took the greedy route of increasing his insurance and fines. He continued driving, with a bit more discetion, for the entire 18 months of his license suspension.
I have a 300zx and a moving company damaged the groundafect. My insurance company (mercury) said they would only pay 50% of the repair cost, because "those cars are low to the ground and the damage was probably already there" When I said I have pictures taken just days before, thier answer was are they from under the car? Because the paint was scraped off so some of the groundafect was even if there was no damage. Are they kidding with this?
The damage had to be there when they wrote the policy. Ask them to show you the pictures they took of the vehicle when the policy was issued so you could verify the damage was there
If it occured any time after, they cant pin prior damage on you and its the insurance company that has to prove it was already there. Since it is a unilateral contract.. Your argument, though probably would cost more than the damages to litigate, would hold up in court.
That said, the moving company is actually the responsible party in this situation and should be paying for the damages.
Anyone have experience with this company? I've been looking for quotes on the net as Geico has decided to not renew my insurance because of something that happened two years ago, suspended license although the charges were dropped in court due to police abuse and negligence. I did a google and there's lots of complaints. 21st doesn't serve my area. Any recommendations or suggestions? : ) Mackabee
Was paying $4200/yr with IFA for a 2000 Ford Ranger Pickup and '04 Hyundai Sonata (NJ highest insurance state). They sent me a non-renewal notice for not returning a stupid questionnaire, so I switched to Geico and am saving almost $2200/yr. Sounds like a wild commercial, but it's true. Some doubt Geico will stay in NJ, but I'm enjoying the savings as long as it lasts.
One more thing, does anyone from NJ know how long the surcharge is imposed for a lapse in coverage, and how much it might be? It happened to my brother. He then got Geico too but they don't break it down for him and couldn't tell him how long he would have the surcharge...
Depends on the company, some only check the most recent for coverage and dont verify how long it spanned. Lapse can change rates within 0-5 years. Most count last 3.
Hi chevygirl! Farm Bureau is the cheapeast I have found. I have a 1995 camaro, 1999 Toyota Tacoma and 1986 Toyota. the 1999 tacoma is full coverage and the other 2 are liability only. We pay $506.00 every six months watch your deductibles whe chose high deductibles insurance companies are going to get you either way you go higher premiums for lower deductibles and lower premiums for higher deductibles good luck
What state are you in? I bought a policy from Safeco online (www.safeco.com), and got a good rate. Didn't know much about them, but they've been around a while so I figured they're reputable. I'm paying $460/6 mo for a 2000 BMW 528 with full coverage in the Seattle metro area.
have a 2004 Mazda RX8, divorced female age 36, clean driving record, no claims other than a broken windshield a few year's back, full coverage, low deductibles ($500), pay:
Mr. Moderator, I would appreciate if you would create a new forum with this topic. Thanks! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------
This question has been bugging me for some time now and I need to know what the reality is. Why is it that insurance companies are allowed to dicriminate on the basis of gender, age and maritial status?
I see the standard replies - insurances companies maintain acturial tables which give them the accident rate by various categories and they base their premiums on that.
But here is my question. Why should someone's insurance premium not be determined solely by his/her driving history? I work in a financial services firm (consumer lending) and we are required, under law, to make decisions ONLY on the basis of a person's credit history. We can also come up with tables which show customers' risk profiles on the bais of various classifications but forget look, we are not even allowed to talk about any such possibility without the threat of a class-action lawsuit. We are allowed no form of classification, not even age.
The money lending business is all about estimating a person's risk and charging appropriate interest for that. As is insurance, the premium is to be correlated to one's risk assessment.
But why should I be judged on the basis of what other people like me behave like? Why should I not be judged on the basis of my own driving record? Is grouping me on the basis of my age/gender/maritial status and then making assumption of my behaviour based on that group's behaviour not discrimination?
And if some forms of bias are allowed, why stop there? Why then should we also not have different premiums for different races? I am sure that if one were to start building acturial tables, one could very well end up seeing some difference between races.
Is anyone aware of any lawsuits / class action suits being files against insurance companies for this kind of discrimination? Has there been some judgement passed on this issue. Given my logic above, I see no reason why my behaviour should be stereotyped by my gender or age for insurance, if the same is not allowed when granting me credit. Both the business are abou charging a premium for risk.
As you may have guessed, I am the MOST discriminated against segment within the auto insurance industry. I am male, single and under 25 years of age. I have a perfectly clean driving history but I pay MORE than what 25+ married women with accidents and speeding tickets on their record pay. How on earth is that fair?
I apologize if this discussion has already been carried out elsewhere on some other forum. I would appreciate it if you someone would guide me to those discussions.
As to your questions, please contact your state insurance commissioner office. They usually have printed material that answers your questions, but until then, remember your industry and the insurance business has this major difference. The insurance companies pay a lot of claims of much higher amounts than a financial services firm pays out as a result of adversity.
Thanks for the suggestion, euphonium. I will follow up with the material at the insurance commissioner's office.
As far as the difference between the two industries goes, I have two points
1) The insurance companies do have higher number of claims. However they also charge an average customer more. An insurance company makes much more money per customer (without adjusting for losses) than a financial services firm does. That extra money is adjusted again higher claims (financial services firms also have losses, though smaller, and they have to service the loans too). At the end of the day, the risk adjusted returns of the two industries would be round-about at the same place. If it were not so, everyone would leave one and go to the other.
2) Even if the losses/costs were higher, that cannot be made a ground for discriminatory practices which are not allowed elsewhere. For example, even within the financial services industry, mortgages are much lower risk than say credit cards. So should credit card issuers be allowed to utilize other classifications like age etc. to make more money? To understand how strict the rules against discrimination of any kind are in the financial services industry, you just need to visit Federal Trade Commission's website and look at the Equal Credit Opportunites act.
At the end of the day, I should be judged on the basis of what I do. I had no control over my being male and I am not under 25 by choice. Why then should I be penalized for either of these? How different is it from someone being penalized on the basis of his race?
Insurance only works because you are spreading the risk over a large population.. Either you want to be part of that population, or you don't...
Otherwise, every time you have an accident or a ticket, your rates will increase by 1000%.. Because, after all, they are judging you on the basis of what you do...
So, in your case, we can offer you insurance for only $1000/year, but if you have a ticket or accident, we'll increase it to $10K./yr..
I do not understand the economic basis of "spreading risk over a population" statement. As far as I know, insurance works because everyone assumes that they may get into trouble and so they keep paying some amount regularly so that the one time big payment does not affect them, IF they get into trouble. The insurance companies estimate how often people will get into trouble and charge premiums accordingly so that they still make a profit.
Yes, I want to be judged on the basis of what I do. Do you not? Do you want to be admitted into college on the basis of what the general IQ level of your race is? Do you want your job application to be evaluated on the basis of what kind of work people of your age/race generally do?
I also do not understand you $1k/$10k argument.
1) Even in the present scenario, my premium would shoot up if I were involved in an accident
2) I dont see why we would have to move to that scenario if we eliminated the age/gender discrimination. Instead of every woman's insurance premium being less that every man's by $ 200 (assuming they have the same driving history), men would pay $100 less and women would pay $100 more. How on earth does that mean that a moment a man is involved in an accident his qoute would have to go up to $10,000? What changes except for the $200 discriminatory pricing to make the scenario so drastic? The insurance company is still making the same amount of money from the entire population. Its just that women are not being unfairly favored and men are not being discriminated against.
Could you please explain how you came to the $10,000 conclusion?
" Could you please explain how you came to the $10,000 conclusion? "
I believe the dollar amounts were exaggerations, but I see his point. . Insurance companies base rates according to statistics and risk. A male, under 25 yr old driver statistically has more accidents than any other group. And I agree with that assessment as I have 2 sons in that category and know their driving habits. They are the same as mine were when I was under 25. . I'm not saying it's right or wrong, It's just the way it is.
You don't seem to have a good handle on how insurance works...
But, just to answer your questions..
They can't rate you on "what you do", because you don't have a long enough history... That is one reason why new/younger drivers pay higher rates...
I totaled a car in '98..my fault entirely... My rates increased by.... (get ready...)
ZERO!!
Why? I'd been with the same insurance company since 1985 and never had a claim that was my fault.. I had a history... I didn't even lose my "accident free" discount..
You might try comparing it to life insurance... 25 year olds get much better rates than 45 year olds... Why? Because they use your demographic information to assess the future risk of insuring you... It works the same way with auto insurance..
It is all about risk.. No one can follow you around to assess your risk.. They have to use demographics... and your personal history.. the shorter your personal history, the more they have to depend on the demographic..
of this story. KYFDX...you're right, younger folks have no records to justify calling them essentially good or bad drivers, so they assume they will be bad ones (usually good call) and you have to earn a "good driver" record (kinda guilty until proven innocent).
However, when I got divorced at 29, my insurance rates went up dramatically (small price to pay to lose the husband). It was kinda strange because my driving habits, my driving record did not change, my age and gender stayed the same, but my rates went up. I thought it was because I lost my multi-car discount, which did account for a certain amount of it, but my marital status was the largest factor in the increase?
"but my marital status was the largest factor in the increase? "
Exactly,
The ins companies havce EVERY angle covered.
you know, they can make BILLIONS off investment income, but if they pay out more pin losses than they take in in premious in a fiscal year, they get to count that year as a "loss" - go figure.
Insurance works first and foremost on the theory of large numbers. The companies know that based on the laws of probability, there will be a certain percentage of people involved in accidents. They just don't know exactly WHO or WHEN.
32 years ago, Hawaii outlawed factors such as gender, age, marital status, and length of driving experience in rating drivers, limiting legitimate factors to claims history, driving record (tickets), vehicle type, and vehicle usage (includes estimated mileage use). Discounts for multi-car, good student, anti-theft devices, supporting lines (homeowners insurance with the same carrier), and claim-free history remained available.
Despite this, many companies (e.g. State Farm, Allstate) continued to use these "illegal" criteria for three decades until they were finally cited and fined a few years ago.
The companies establish base premiums on the population as a whole, then surcharge and/or discount premiums based on these secondary factors. All of these factors vary from company to company.
As to the subject matter of this thread, I pay $1088.90 every six months for three vehicles, as follows:
2001 Honda Odyssey EX - $ 398.10; 1998 Nissan Altima SE - $319.50; 1996 Acura 3.5RL - $371.30.
Limits are $300K BI, $50K PD, $60K PIP, $250 ded COMP, $500 ded COLL, T/L. Applicable discounts include multi-car, anti-lock brakes, anti-theft devices, five-year good driving record, passive restraints. I declined UM and UND as these coverages apply only to medical payments (PIP) - UM/UND for PD (property damage) is not offered here.
The comprehensive premium charge for the RL is 65% higher than the Odyssey although the Ody is rated T/F work and the RL is pleasure driving. It must be the higher cost for crash/replacement parts.
In my case, these premiums are very reasonable and partially offsets our astronomical food ($5.50/box of cereal), gas ($2.449/gallon is the lowest for premium), and real estate prices (median single family home is $610K+).
I agree with your comments about car insurance, however, you are asking this from the perspective of a person in the financial services organization? A good credit score gets you low interest rates and a bad credit score gets you no loan or high interest rates (in addition to a load of sucker fees in the mortgage industry). How is this different than the statistical-based age discrimination for charging rates used by auto insurers? One is income based discrimination- the other age. Try working as a research engineer. You'll see academic based discrimination (ie MIT trumps Drexel). Travel on an airplane (1st class or frequent flyer trumps new flyer for seat selection). Buy a new car (male gets initial lower quote than female for price). Welcome to the real world. In retrospect of my life, I was involved in two car accidents (one at 17, one at 18-neither my fault) and haven't been in one since. The experience of logging 15 years of driving has made me a safer driver. I am quite confident that I could have avoided those accidents through defensive driving if I were put in a similar situation today. I don't like paying car insurance either (mainly because I don't profit from it), but I'm not as angry about it anymore since their statistical tables held true.
I'll take at one more shot at trying to explain why this is discrimination.
john500 Yes I raise this point from the perpective of a person working in the financial services industry. Your credit score depends upon whatyoudo, on how youmanage your finances and on whether youhave made any late payments. It does not depend on what other men of your race and your age do. All the the variables that go into calculating your credit score are completly defined by you, john500, the individual and you also exercise personal control over each of those variables (except for length of history).
Proof of the fact is that I currently have a very high credit score, which is better than millions of people with 10 times my credit history. I started off with no credit history (which is considered to be equivakent to poor credit history) and survived some horrible deals. But today, I get the best offers. I cannot say that I control my insurance premium the same way (inspite of NO tickets and NO crashes. I am de-facto assumed to be risky no based on how I drive. That is discrimination).
You ask how credit scoring is different from statistically different from auto-insunce premiums? The credit score is based on an individual and his behaviour. You control your credit score and can take it in either direction, thereby impacting the interest rates you get. Auto insurance is based on classifying populations. No matter how I drive, I will always be charged extra for being a man. I do not control that.
Another point of difference is that in the consumer finance business, we are not allowed absolutely any form of mass-classification. Google for equal credit opportunities act to know more. Even though there are very may be trends if you start classifying credit history on the basis of race, gender, age, place of stay etc., the credit scoring system is EXPLICITY prohibited from using any of these criteria.
I do not deny that young men may have higher crash rates. What pains me is the duplicity in laws. If absolutely similiar kinds of discrimination are abhorred in other areas, why allow them here? And if we are so concerned about risk distribution, they why are there no differential rates on the basis of race? It is an open secret within the insurance industry there there is a racial bias in the crash and claims rates (and there have been violation and punitive actions takes for the same). I am sure you can build up statistical tables on that. So why not go in there? Too touchy an issue? But please explain how that is any different from the existing classifications.
As far as your other examples are concerned, I do not deny that there are implicit acts of discrimination in all walks of life. But there are certain areas where the government has actively created rules for non-discrimination. Why the dichotomy in different areas?
mikefm58 I understand that premiums are based on statistical tables. But if you leave it alone on the basis of 'thats the way is' you need to go through http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/credit/ecoa.htm
A lot of things are not allowed to just be a way.
kyfdx I understand that when you start off you dont have a long history. The same is with credit histories. But based on your individual behaviour, you can end up with a very good score very quickly. In insurance you continue to be penalized.
Its not just age that they discriminate on. A 40 year old man pays more than a 40 year old woman. That is not due to history, is it?
So going by this logic, all risky populations should be charged higher. I agree in principle. So lets get some more classifications in. Why stop here? And while we are at it, let us also trash the whole equal credit opportunity thing. I am surprised to see that financial services industries are under instense scrutiny to make sure that there is no discrimination going on. The credit scoring system may automatically put large numbers (not all) of certain races into lower buckets because of ther financial behaviour. The race of those people is unknown while generating the score. The government even has a problem with that happening and they smell discrimination there (recently reported in newspapers, government investigation a numbers of fin services firms on this). And insurance companies rampantly pursue all kinds of discriminatory activities!
At the end of the day, young male drivers induce scorn from the older people. They are considered to be the "menace" and it probably makes other people happy to see them being discriminated against. Anyways its the "other" people who control things and as long as the discrimination is in their favor, why should they care? However, history has seen many such forms of discrimination which have taken extreme forms ("Jews are blood-sucking businessmen / all muslims are terrorists" etc etc). Its all about being in a society free of discrimination. And if we believe that discrimination makes sense, we should they let it apply to other places too instead of taking the phoney anti-discriminatory attitude elsewhere.
For concluding statistics, just in case someone does not believe in any of the above mentioned logic and things there should be mass-classification, think about this. According to institute of highway safety, for 2003, out of every 100,000 male drivers between age 20-24, 99,972 did not die in a car crash. Out of every 100,000 male drivers between age 30-59, 99,988 did not die in a car crash. I know that the reverse figures (number of deaths) look much sexier becuse one can easily start drawing conclusions about twice the death rate.
However, the fact remains. So out of every 100,000 drivers, 99,972 20-24yr olds do not die in a car crash as opposed to 99,988 for 30-59 yr olds. Thats a full 0.016% difference!! However, that 0.0016% difference is sufficient to make those 99,972 scum as compared to the 99,988. Isnt that awesome?
Move to "paradise" because those rating factors are "illegal" and cannot be used in determining auto insurance premiums. Even though it took the government three decades to catch up with the companies that did.
..while regulated.. are for the most part.. profit-making enterprises..
If they could make money, insuring people as you wish them to do.... then, I'm sure you could find an insurer willing to rate you just on your (limited) driving history, without regard to sex, age, or marital status...
I think you would find, if that were the case... .. that the surcharge that would be put on you for a short driving history, would be much higher than what you are paying now for being under 25, unmarried and male...
In other words... insurance is rated for the average person in a demographic..
If the only demographic that you allow is length of driving experience and accident and ticket history, then those variables will come with extreme premium surcharges...
It also isn't fair that my health insurance premiums are higher because other people are uninsured..... But, I don't consider it discriminatory..
Think of it as "discernment" rather than discrimination. Applicants with maturity, excellent credit, professional standing, and driving history, have, by their behavioral history enjoyed lower premiums than young dropouts, with bad credit, avoiding child care payments, unemployed, and cloudy MVR's. Each group being the same sex and age. Conservative attitudes and lifestyles demonstrating personal responsibility are rewarded accordingly.
I posted a question re: Esurance, but not sure I posted in the right area.
Has anyone here looked into them? My son just bought an auto policy from them (male, 22 yrs old, single) and I am a little worried since I can't find much info on them. Thanks! :confuse:
I bought a new Honda CRV last month. GEICO refused to give me Albany, NY rates (my residence) because I work in NYC Mon-Fri, even though I travel to Albany on weekends. They were quoting me $4400/year for a vehicle parked in Albany to be used only for leisure on weekends. I switched to Metlife which is charging me $590/year for full coverage. After I told GEICO I was switching and to cancel my policy, they offered to reduce my premiums to $1800/year. I am 28 yrs, this is my first car purchase, been in the US just 3 years (so a short driving record, including a 2 point non-moving violation). I do not understand how a move from NYC to Albany (other factors remaining constant) warrants a $3800/year drop in premium!
I'm thinking it is a good thing that you shopped around... It would bother me that a company could just drop their quote by $2600/yr., when faced with a little competition, though... Sometimes a company just doesn't want to write a policy in a certain area.. So, they price themselves out of the market..
I bought an old car once... Paid $6K for it.. it was just a weekend toy.. A second car... My then current insurance company wanted $1500/yr to insure it... Nuts.. I was paying about $500/yr for full coverage on the other car I had at the time....
So, I shopped around, and State Farm insured it for $385/yr... full coverage.. That was 1985, and I've been with them ever since..
I've heard good things about MetLife car insurance... They have a "group" plan through my company... With discounted rates... So, a lot of my co-workers are with them... No complaints.
I pay $380 per year per car, basic coverage, no collision. My agent told me any car I get will cost this much without collision coverage. I'm a 41 year old male with an ok driving record.
One possibility is that, assuming full coverage, or almost full coverage, is that the car is more likely to be totalled, burned, vandalized (!!!), or stolen in NYC compared to Albany...while that is a heck of a large drop, $3800, I could see it...
A similar story may answer that, and this goes back to the 1970s...one of the warehouses where we ordered our auto parts was located in NYC...they had to put up barbed wire, iron bars on their windows and doors, lived in fear of daily crime, all because of that which lives in NYC...their business insurance was atronomical in cost...they decided to leave the city and move up the NY Thruway near Duchess County, I believe, or that general area...
The move cost them about 1 million dollars...they saved so much in their business insurance that THEY PAID FOR THE MOVE IN 2 YEARS just by the savings in their insurance...that is how bad NYC is, and that goes back 30 years... :surprise:
You can see some tremendous differences in car insurance rates by moving 4-5 blocks. I had an agent transpose a number that "moved" me from Dearborn to Detroit and my insurance increased 200%.
And more companies are relocating from the north due to workers compensation insurance rates than business casualty rates.
Interesting, I lived in Detroit in the 1980s, on Telegraph, and my business was on West Warren Road, south side, placing it in Dearborn Heights instead of Detroit...also lived in Woodhaven, near Trenton (aka "Downriver") and lived for 6 years in Southfield, near 9 MIle and BeechDaly...at the corner of BeechDaly was a small strip mall with the best soft custard ice cream, Custard's Last Stand, and the best deli in the world, easily competing with Carnegie in NY, is Bread Basket Deli, on 10-1/2 mile and Greenfield Road...
Yes. the Workers Comp here in GA is highly regulated, so businesses come south because their comp costs are less than half, if they don't go to Mexico or overseas...
A client lost his index finger in a work accident...full value here in GA is $13,500 for the finger...in the industrialized midwest, that finger would probably be worth $30-50,000...I wouldn't sell you my index finger for a $million... :shades:
I know that there is a difference in premiums with mileage. What would the premium increase be roughly by going from a < 10,000 miles to <15,000 miles? Quite a bit? I am certain it varies by other factors...but roughly how much difference all factors being equal.
Does anyone have a any recommendations on selecting an insurance company? I'm quite aggravated with Geico at the moment*, and would like to give my business to a company that doesn't assume I'm trying to rip them off. (I understand most folks would if they could, but I don't even when I can, and I'm tired of mental defectives who can't tell the difference).
Earlier this year I upped my coverage to 1/3/100 W/50K medpay (Thanks Marsha7) for $800/yr.
Ideally, I would prefer a policy that insures me, not a specific car.
Thanks, -Greg
* Ugh, I'll try to be positive here. Short story is that after 5? years these imbeciles still haven't figured out that billing address is not the same as shipping address. I don't know the billing address, that's the POINT of having a billpay service. So, I call in to see if the chip in my windshield is covered. They won't talk to me without the "the right" address. After 20 min of this I tell them not to bother. Their parting shot: "I'm still filing the claim anyway". In other words, I'm credible when Geico wants to upcharge me, just not when they have to DO THEIR &^%^ JOB. Cretins.
silly, nut you might survey friends and neighbors for their claims experience...and that is what you must survey, folks who have had CLAIMS experience, whether their fault or the other guy's fault...ALL ins co are polite when they take your premium and will promise the moon and the first 2 rings of Saturn...
Where you determine how good they are is with those folks who have made claims and had to deal with (fight with?) the adjuster...an example shall follow :shades:
Here in GA, while dealing with State Farm and Allstate (as the at-fault insurance company) never a picnic, ther is one major difference that I see for my clients...they will both pay for a rental car (this is why I tell clients to pay the lousy $15 yearly for rental insurance, as they never know which ins will hit them) but State Farm will call Enterprise and set up an account to pay direct for your rental car...
Allstate, OTOH, will abide by the law and pay, but they make you rent the car, pay for the rental, and then reimburse you...what if the victim driver is under 25, or does not have a credit card to rent, or cannot advance the $$$ for a rental car???
Assuming you rent a car on the 1st of the month, pay for a week, then send in your receipt to Allstate...on an efficient day, they will repay you in 7-10 days...if you are short $$$, by the time they pay you, you will have paid for the first week, the second week, and maybe the 3rd week, and you have still not been paid back by Allstate...this is how they treat the innocent victim, they are not much better when they take car of their own, IMO...so, if you buy Allstate, and if you cause the wreck, you know how they will treat the person you hit, imagine how they will treat you...
you may be "in good hands", but I have no faith in that statement...just my thinking...
m7, thanks for the feedback. Unfortunately, I don't know anyone who actually had an auto claim in the last decade - everyone I know just pays out of pocket for fear their rates will go up.
Interesting contrast, though it does conflict me somewhat, as I know State Farm has unfriendly diminished value language in their policy.
Heard anything on Progressive lately?
Oh, hey, I wonder... In GA, can an individual to self-insure the first few thousand in liability & approach a re-insurer to lay off the rest of the exposure? Kind of like an ultra-high deductible... (Just a hypothetical, I'm not looking to do that)
I can also state that state farm was the best company i had to deal with so far as an at fault company. USAA is the best I ever dealt with as my insurer.
I believe you CAN self insure your vehicles, the same way you can self insure your company in Workers Comp, you must purchase a bond that states that you have sufficient funds available to pay claims up to a certain amount (the amt is not known by me)...the bonding company will issue a certificate (the bond) certifying that you have the funds, and the certificate serves in place of your proof of insurance card...
Naturally, the bonding company will only bond those folks financially stable, Ross Perot, Warren Buffet, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Mel Gibson... :shades: :shades:
I have a question... I have just been informed about an accident that I got into 3 years ago. I am not sure if it was my fault, but at the time I had 2 way coverage insurance. We exchanged information, but I did not report it because I thought it would be less than 500.00 since my car had minor damages and the other car slightly more. However, the damages are much more and since they have been trying to get a hold of me , but I did not get any of their messages since I am away at school. Now their insurance is coming after us with an attorney to pay the damages. What advice can you give me on this... Do you know if my old insurance will cover this, though I did not report it? Please help me and give me all the advice you can. I am lost. Thanks much.
not to take over for the hosts, but this is the wrong discussion and I see you already posted there - you're going to get a wrist slapping from the hosts for spam posting. :P
Oh, and I answered your oher post.
And you will be paying more for ins now, if this carrier doesn't drop ypu.
schung, if you need help finding your other message, please hit the "my recent posts" link at the left.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
Comments
If it occured any time after, they cant pin prior damage on you and its the insurance company that has to prove it was already there. Since it is a unilateral contract.. Your argument, though probably would cost more than the damages to litigate, would hold up in court.
That said, the moving company is actually the responsible party in this situation and should be paying for the damages.
: )
Mackabee
glad to see ya on .!
Terry.
Thanks......
..prior to DUI two vehicles were $580 per year.....
then the annual rates were $2900/1800/1600/1400 and finally 1100 this year........
..this involved dorking around with four insurance companies over a three year period......
..and that;s just one fiscal aspect.............
...moral of the story (do I really have to spell it out?)............................ez
$1200 year
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------
This question has been bugging me for some time now and I need to know what the reality is. Why is it that insurance companies are allowed to dicriminate on the basis of gender, age and maritial status?
I see the standard replies - insurances companies maintain acturial tables which give them the accident rate by various categories and they base their premiums on that.
But here is my question. Why should someone's insurance premium not be determined solely by his/her driving history? I work in a financial services firm (consumer lending) and we are required, under law, to make decisions ONLY on the basis of a person's credit history. We can also come up with tables which show customers' risk profiles on the bais of various classifications but forget look, we are not even allowed to talk about any such possibility without the threat of a class-action lawsuit. We are allowed no form of classification, not even age.
The money lending business is all about estimating a person's risk and charging appropriate interest for that. As is insurance, the premium is to be correlated to one's risk assessment.
But why should I be judged on the basis of what other people like me behave like? Why should I not be judged on the basis of my own driving record? Is grouping me on the basis of my age/gender/maritial status and then making assumption of my behaviour based on that group's behaviour not discrimination?
And if some forms of bias are allowed, why stop there? Why then should we also not have different premiums for different races? I am sure that if one were to start building acturial tables, one could very well end up seeing some difference between races.
Is anyone aware of any lawsuits / class action suits being files against insurance companies for this kind of discrimination? Has there been some judgement passed on this issue. Given my logic above, I see no reason why my behaviour should be stereotyped by my gender or age for insurance, if the same is not allowed when granting me credit. Both the business are abou charging a premium for risk.
As you may have guessed, I am the MOST discriminated against segment within the auto insurance industry. I am male, single and under 25 years of age. I have a perfectly clean driving history but I pay MORE than what 25+ married women with accidents and speeding tickets on their record pay. How on earth is that fair?
I apologize if this discussion has already been carried out elsewhere on some other forum. I would appreciate it if you someone would guide me to those discussions.
Good suggestion.
As to your questions, please contact your state insurance commissioner office.
They usually have printed material that answers your questions, but until then, remember your industry and the insurance business has this major difference. The insurance companies pay a lot of claims of much higher amounts than a financial services firm pays out as a result of adversity.
As far as the difference between the two industries goes, I have two points
1) The insurance companies do have higher number of claims. However they also charge an average customer more. An insurance company makes much more money per customer (without adjusting for losses) than a financial services firm does. That extra money is adjusted again higher claims (financial services firms also have losses, though smaller, and they have to service the loans too). At the end of the day, the risk adjusted returns of the two industries would be round-about at the same place. If it were not so, everyone would leave one and go to the other.
2) Even if the losses/costs were higher, that cannot be made a ground for discriminatory practices which are not allowed elsewhere. For example, even within the financial services industry, mortgages are much lower risk than say credit cards. So should credit card issuers be allowed to utilize other classifications like age etc. to make more money? To understand how strict the rules against discrimination of any kind are in the financial services industry, you just need to visit Federal Trade Commission's website and look at the Equal Credit Opportunites act.
At the end of the day, I should be judged on the basis of what I do. I had no control over my being male and I am not under 25 by choice. Why then should I be penalized for either of these? How different is it from someone being penalized on the basis of his race?
Are you sure?
Insurance only works because you are spreading the risk over a large population.. Either you want to be part of that population, or you don't...
Otherwise, every time you have an accident or a ticket, your rates will increase by 1000%.. Because, after all, they are judging you on the basis of what you do...
So, in your case, we can offer you insurance for only $1000/year, but if you have a ticket or accident, we'll increase it to $10K./yr..
Do you want to sign up for that deal?
regards,
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
The insurance companies estimate how often people will get into trouble and charge premiums accordingly so that they still make a profit.
Yes, I want to be judged on the basis of what I do. Do you not? Do you want to be admitted into college on the basis of what the general IQ level of your race is? Do you want your job application to be evaluated on the basis of what kind of work people of your age/race generally do?
I also do not understand you $1k/$10k argument.
1) Even in the present scenario, my premium would shoot up if I were involved in an accident
2) I dont see why we would have to move to that scenario if we eliminated the age/gender discrimination. Instead of every woman's insurance premium being less that every man's by $ 200 (assuming they have the same driving history), men would pay $100 less and women would pay $100 more. How on earth does that mean that a moment a man is involved in an accident his qoute would have to go up to $10,000? What changes except for the $200 discriminatory pricing to make the scenario so drastic? The insurance company is still making the same amount of money from the entire population. Its just that women are not being unfairly favored and men are not being discriminated against.
Could you please explain how you came to the $10,000 conclusion?
I believe the dollar amounts were exaggerations, but I see his point.
.
Insurance companies base rates according to statistics and risk. A male, under 25 yr old driver statistically has more accidents than any other group. And I agree with that assessment as I have 2 sons in that category and know their driving habits. They are the same as mine were when I was under 25.
.
I'm not saying it's right or wrong, It's just the way it is.
But, just to answer your questions..
They can't rate you on "what you do", because you don't have a long enough history... That is one reason why new/younger drivers pay higher rates...
I totaled a car in '98..my fault entirely... My rates increased by.... (get ready...)
ZERO!!
Why? I'd been with the same insurance company since 1985 and never had a claim that was my fault.. I had a history... I didn't even lose my "accident free" discount..
You might try comparing it to life insurance... 25 year olds get much better rates than 45 year olds... Why? Because they use your demographic information to assess the future risk of insuring you... It works the same way with auto insurance..
It is all about risk.. No one can follow you around to assess your risk.. They have to use demographics... and your personal history.. the shorter your personal history, the more they have to depend on the demographic..
regards,
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
However, when I got divorced at 29, my insurance rates went up dramatically (small price to pay to lose the husband). It was kinda strange because my driving habits, my driving record did not change, my age and gender stayed the same, but my rates went up. I thought it was because I lost my multi-car discount, which did account for a certain amount of it, but my marital status was the largest factor in the increase?
Exactly,
The ins companies havce EVERY angle covered.
you know, they can make BILLIONS off investment income, but if they pay out more pin losses than they take in in premious in a fiscal year, they get to count that year as a "loss" - go figure.
Oh, wait... were we talking about cars??
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
32 years ago, Hawaii outlawed factors such as gender, age, marital status, and length of driving experience in rating drivers, limiting legitimate factors to claims history, driving record (tickets), vehicle type, and vehicle usage (includes estimated mileage use). Discounts for multi-car, good student, anti-theft devices, supporting lines (homeowners insurance with the same carrier), and claim-free history remained available.
Despite this, many companies (e.g. State Farm, Allstate) continued to use these "illegal" criteria for three decades until they were finally cited and fined a few years ago.
The companies establish base premiums on the population as a whole, then surcharge and/or discount premiums based on these secondary factors. All of these factors vary from company to company.
As to the subject matter of this thread, I pay $1088.90 every six months for three vehicles, as follows:
2001 Honda Odyssey EX - $ 398.10;
1998 Nissan Altima SE - $319.50;
1996 Acura 3.5RL - $371.30.
Limits are $300K BI, $50K PD, $60K PIP, $250 ded COMP, $500 ded COLL, T/L. Applicable discounts include multi-car, anti-lock brakes, anti-theft devices, five-year good driving record, passive restraints. I declined UM and UND as these coverages apply only to medical payments (PIP) - UM/UND for PD (property damage) is not offered here.
The comprehensive premium charge for the RL is 65% higher than the Odyssey although the Ody is rated T/F work and the RL is pleasure driving. It must be the higher cost for crash/replacement parts.
In my case, these premiums are very reasonable and partially offsets our astronomical food ($5.50/box of cereal), gas ($2.449/gallon is the lowest for premium), and real estate prices (median single family home is $610K+).
In retrospect of my life, I was involved in two car accidents (one at 17, one at 18-neither my fault) and haven't been in one since. The experience of logging 15 years of driving has made me a safer driver. I am quite confident that I could have avoided those accidents through defensive driving if I were put in a similar situation today. I don't like paying car insurance either (mainly because I don't profit from it), but I'm not as angry about it anymore since their statistical tables held true.
john500
Yes I raise this point from the perpective of a person working in the financial services industry. Your credit score depends upon what you do, on how you manage your finances and on whether you have made any late payments. It does not depend on what other men of your race and your age do. All the the variables that go into calculating your credit score are completly defined by you , john500, the individual and you also exercise personal control over each of those variables (except for length of history).
Proof of the fact is that I currently have a very high credit score, which is better than millions of people with 10 times my credit history. I started off with no credit history (which is considered to be equivakent to poor credit history) and survived some horrible deals. But today, I get the best offers. I cannot say that I control my insurance premium the same way (inspite of NO tickets and NO crashes. I am de-facto assumed to be risky no based on how I drive. That is discrimination).
You ask how credit scoring is different from statistically different from auto-insunce premiums? The credit score is based on an individual and his behaviour. You control your credit score and can take it in either direction, thereby impacting the interest rates you get. Auto insurance is based on classifying populations. No matter how I drive, I will always be charged extra for being a man. I do not control that.
Another point of difference is that in the consumer finance business, we are not allowed absolutely any form of mass-classification. Google for equal credit opportunities act to know more. Even though there are very may be trends if you start classifying credit history on the basis of race, gender, age, place of stay etc., the credit scoring system is EXPLICITY prohibited from using any of these criteria.
I do not deny that young men may have higher crash rates. What pains me is the duplicity in laws. If absolutely similiar kinds of discrimination are abhorred in other areas, why allow them here? And if we are so concerned about risk distribution, they why are there no differential rates on the basis of race? It is an open secret within the insurance industry there there is a racial bias in the crash and claims rates (and there have been violation and punitive actions takes for the same). I am sure you can build up statistical tables on that. So why not go in there? Too touchy an issue? But please explain how that is any different from the existing classifications.
As far as your other examples are concerned, I do not deny that there are implicit acts of discrimination in all walks of life. But there are certain areas where the government has actively created rules for non-discrimination. Why the dichotomy in different areas?
mikefm58
I understand that premiums are based on statistical tables. But if you leave it alone on the basis of 'thats the way is' you need to go through
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/credit/ecoa.htm
A lot of things are not allowed to just be a way.
kyfdx
I understand that when you start off you dont have a long history. The same is with credit histories. But based on your individual behaviour, you can end up with a very good score very quickly. In insurance you continue to be penalized.
Its not just age that they discriminate on. A 40 year old man pays more than a 40 year old woman. That is not due to history, is it?
So going by this logic, all risky populations should be charged higher. I agree in principle. So lets get some more classifications in. Why stop here? And while we are at it, let us also trash the whole equal credit opportunity thing. I am surprised to see that financial services industries are under instense scrutiny to make sure that there is no discrimination going on. The credit scoring system may automatically put large numbers (not all) of certain races into lower buckets because of ther financial behaviour. The race of those people is unknown while generating the score. The government even has a problem with that happening and they smell discrimination there (recently reported in newspapers, government investigation a numbers of fin services firms on this). And insurance companies rampantly pursue all kinds of discriminatory activities!
At the end of the day, young male drivers induce scorn from the older people. They are considered to be the "menace" and it probably makes other people happy to see them being discriminated against. Anyways its the "other" people who control things and as long as the discrimination is in their favor, why should they care? However, history has seen many such forms of discrimination which have taken extreme forms ("Jews are blood-sucking businessmen / all muslims are terrorists" etc etc). Its all about being in a society free of discrimination. And if we believe that discrimination makes sense, we should they let it apply to other places too instead of taking the phoney anti-discriminatory attitude elsewhere.
For concluding statistics, just in case someone does not believe in any of the above mentioned logic and things there should be mass-classification, think about this. According to institute of highway safety, for 2003, out of every 100,000 male drivers between age 20-24, 99,972 did not die in a car crash. Out of every 100,000 male drivers between age 30-59, 99,988 did not die in a car crash. I know that the reverse figures (number of deaths) look much sexier becuse one can easily start drawing conclusions about twice the death rate.
However, the fact remains. So out of every 100,000 drivers, 99,972 20-24yr olds do not die in a car crash as opposed to 99,988 for 30-59 yr olds. Thats a full 0.016% difference!! However, that 0.0016% difference is sufficient to make those 99,972 scum as compared to the 99,988. Isnt that awesome?
If they could make money, insuring people as you wish them to do.... then, I'm sure you could find an insurer willing to rate you just on your (limited) driving history, without regard to sex, age, or marital status...
I think you would find, if that were the case... .. that the surcharge that would be put on you for a short driving history, would be much higher than what you are paying now for being under 25, unmarried and male...
In other words... insurance is rated for the average person in a demographic..
If the only demographic that you allow is length of driving experience and accident and ticket history, then those variables will come with extreme premium surcharges...
It also isn't fair that my health insurance premiums are higher because other people are uninsured..... But, I don't consider it discriminatory..
regards,
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Has anyone here looked into them? My son just bought an auto policy from them (male, 22 yrs old, single) and I am a little worried since I can't find much info on them. Thanks! :confuse:
I am 28 yrs, this is my first car purchase, been in the US just 3 years (so a short driving record, including a 2 point non-moving violation). I do not understand how a move from NYC to Albany (other factors remaining constant) warrants a $3800/year drop in premium!
Any thoughts?
I bought an old car once... Paid $6K for it.. it was just a weekend toy.. A second car... My then current insurance company wanted $1500/yr to insure it... Nuts.. I was paying about $500/yr for full coverage on the other car I had at the time....
So, I shopped around, and State Farm insured it for $385/yr... full coverage.. That was 1985, and I've been with them ever since..
I've heard good things about MetLife car insurance... They have a "group" plan through my company... With discounted rates... So, a lot of my co-workers are with them... No complaints.
regards,
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
A similar story may answer that, and this goes back to the 1970s...one of the warehouses where we ordered our auto parts was located in NYC...they had to put up barbed wire, iron bars on their windows and doors, lived in fear of daily crime, all because of that which lives in NYC...their business insurance was atronomical in cost...they decided to leave the city and move up the NY Thruway near Duchess County, I believe, or that general area...
The move cost them about 1 million dollars...they saved so much in their business insurance that THEY PAID FOR THE MOVE IN 2 YEARS just by the savings in their insurance...that is how bad NYC is, and that goes back 30 years... :surprise:
You can see some tremendous differences in car insurance rates by moving 4-5 blocks. I had an agent transpose a number that "moved" me from Dearborn to Detroit and my insurance increased 200%.
And more companies are relocating from the north due to workers compensation insurance rates than business casualty rates.
Yes. the Workers Comp here in GA is highly regulated, so businesses come south because their comp costs are less than half, if they don't go to Mexico or overseas...
A client lost his index finger in a work accident...full value here in GA is $13,500 for the finger...in the industrialized midwest, that finger would probably be worth $30-50,000...I wouldn't sell you my index finger for a $million... :shades:
Thanks.
Does anyone have a any recommendations on selecting an insurance company? I'm quite aggravated with Geico at the moment*, and would like to give my business to a company that doesn't assume I'm trying to rip them off. (I understand most folks would if they could, but I don't even when I can, and I'm tired of mental defectives who can't tell the difference).
Earlier this year I upped my coverage to 1/3/100 W/50K medpay (Thanks Marsha7) for $800/yr.
Ideally, I would prefer a policy that insures me, not a specific car.
Thanks,
-Greg
* Ugh, I'll try to be positive here. Short story is that after 5? years these imbeciles still haven't figured out that billing address is not the same as shipping address. I don't know the billing address, that's the POINT of having a billpay service. So, I call in to see if the chip in my windshield is covered. They won't talk to me without the "the right" address. After 20 min of this I tell them not to bother. Their parting shot: "I'm still filing the claim anyway". In other words, I'm credible when Geico wants to upcharge me, just not when they have to DO THEIR &^%^ JOB. Cretins.
Where you determine how good they are is with those folks who have made claims and had to deal with (fight with?) the adjuster...an example shall follow :shades:
Here in GA, while dealing with State Farm and Allstate (as the at-fault insurance company) never a picnic, ther is one major difference that I see for my clients...they will both pay for a rental car (this is why I tell clients to pay the lousy $15 yearly for rental insurance, as they never know which ins will hit them) but State Farm will call Enterprise and set up an account to pay direct for your rental car...
Allstate, OTOH, will abide by the law and pay, but they make you rent the car, pay for the rental, and then reimburse you...what if the victim driver is under 25, or does not have a credit card to rent, or cannot advance the $$$ for a rental car???
Assuming you rent a car on the 1st of the month, pay for a week, then send in your receipt to Allstate...on an efficient day, they will repay you in 7-10 days...if you are short $$$, by the time they pay you, you will have paid for the first week, the second week, and maybe the 3rd week, and you have still not been paid back by Allstate...this is how they treat the innocent victim, they are not much better when they take car of their own, IMO...so, if you buy Allstate, and if you cause the wreck, you know how they will treat the person you hit, imagine how they will treat you...
you may be "in good hands", but I have no faith in that statement...just my thinking...
Interesting contrast, though it does conflict me somewhat, as I know State Farm has unfriendly diminished value language in their policy.
Heard anything on Progressive lately?
Oh, hey, I wonder... In GA, can an individual to self-insure the first few thousand in liability & approach a re-insurer to lay off the rest of the exposure? Kind of like an ultra-high deductible... (Just a hypothetical, I'm not looking to do that)
USAA is the best I ever dealt with as my insurer.
Naturally, the bonding company will only bond those folks financially stable, Ross Perot, Warren Buffet, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Mel Gibson... :shades: :shades:
-Greg
Farmers Ins.
Tundra
House w/ same co.
Clean driving record, 1 claim in 20 years.
Over 35.
Area; Washington State
....sounds pretty good to me. And I've got USAA........
........but then again Navy guys (even USNR) - from my time at least - tend to imbibe.....and - sooner or later - drive into a swamp...........
ez
Oh, and I answered your oher post.
And you will be paying more for ins now, if this carrier doesn't drop ypu.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle