Close

[Boswell]

This really isn't worth arguing over so please close.

Edited September 16, 2008 by Boswell

[UrbanPoet]

Found this on the "MoneySupermarket" forum and was wondering how eveyone else on the here things about the subject. Personally I feel they are discriminating and trying to hide behind statistics, it should be stopped!

Blah, blah, blah the statistics are correct, and companies have to go by them and give higher premiums or else there'd be no point underwriting them. Why should insurance companies underwrite a demographic that is statistically at more risk, at a lower cost than they feel is right?

Should banks give loans to people who are statistically at more risk of defaulting? Oh wait, they did, it's called sub-prime and we're paying the price.

[ZeroMatt]

Don't be such a tit

[boon racoon]

Vote with your feet (know it's not you) and don't drive then.

Far too many people sit there and moan about driving yet never do ANYTHING about it. Driving IS expensive and they moan like they have a right to drive cheaply, yet they obviously don't care enough to do anything about it and stop driving.

[Simpson]

Again another shit topic by Boswell... shock horror

all insurance is based on a "real life" independant risk assesment. they create a statistical model which should resemble the "real world" senario which calculates how likey you are to make a claim of X ammount of money, they then add a shit load of money onto for commision, bonous's and stuff and thats your quote

not all companys will use the same model, fairly obious as there is no ideal "real world model" becuase it can't account for individual differences.

Things that assess your risk:

Experience (years on the road)

Age

Sex

Area of housing

weather your part of any motoring organisations

milage

value of your veichle

engine size

modifications

proffession

etc.....

so you think if we shouldn't discriminate everyone should be charged 200 pound flat fee?

BOLLOCKS - use your brain before your mouth

[Papa Manual]

Far too many people sit there and moan about driving yet never do ANYTHING about it. Driving IS expensive and they moan like they have a right to drive cheaply, yet they obviously don't care enough to do anything about it and stop driving.

Agreed. Having not driven for over 3 years (a slight legal indiscretion), I'd never bother now. The fact that the price of fuel in Guernsey was 56p a litre when I came off the roads, now being 96p has a little to do with it.

[AdamR28]

a slight legal indiscretion

That sounds like the Jon of old Reformed now though I see!

[Boswell]

Again another shit topic by Boswell... shock horror

f**k of Simpson!

[Token]

No seriously, you're topics are f**king shit.

[JD™]

Again another shit topic by Boswell... shock horror

I don't think so. Although I dont agree with the original reason for the topic (i think the insurance companies do a pretty good job at getting the premiums about right), what gives you the right to decide what is a good topic or not? Would you tell you mates to shut up if they decided to chat about it in the pub with you because it was an interesting point? Plus, if it's that shit why are you replying with a solid, well thought out point?

No seriously, you're topics are f**king shit.

Come on, at least simps had the decency to not be such a pr*ck about it.

edit: f'in swear filter

Edited September 16, 2008 by Pocket Rocket

[Pashley26]

Yeah but this is 3 in like two weeks ?

Edited September 16, 2008 by Pashley26

[JD™]

Yeah but this is 3 in like two weeks ?

To be fair this is the best of them so far, surely that should be encouraged rather than just having us old lot decide whether something is topic worthy. We could get really pedantic and say that generally things will only make you happy or angry/sad so just post everything in those threads. f**k it, lets get rid of all of them and have a "things that make you feel something, that everyone must agree with" thread.

[Simpson]

I don't think so. Although I dont agree with the original reason for the topic (i think the insurance companies do a pretty good job at getting the premiums about right), what gives you the right to decide what is a good topic or not? Would you tell you mates to shut up if they decided to chat about it in the pub with you because it was an interesting point? Plus, if it's that shit why are you replying with a solid, well thought out point?

I do think so... shock horror they charge different people different rates!!!! I wouldn't call it discrimination, they are based on facts and statistics, not just, oh your 18 your a chav and you drive too fast an crash, the rates are factual and undeniable

Yea i would tell my mates to shut up if they complained about insurance, I can only think of one of them that doesn't drive like a total tool yet he's still had a crash when he was at fault. out of my 14-15ish friends that had cars all but 1 crashed in the first year. If i owned an insurance company i wouldn't touch any of them with a barge pole.

I replyed with a solid thought out point, because thats what i try to do before i hit, "post a topic" or "reply"

All in

10

f**king

days

[JD™]

I do think so... shock horror they charge different people different rates!!!! I wouldn't call it discrimination, they are based on facts and statistics, not just, oh your 18 your a chav and you drive too fast an crash, the rates are factual and undeniable

Yea i would tell my mates to shut up if they complained about insurance, I can only think of one of them that doesn't drive like a total tool yet he's still had a crash when he was at fault. out of my 14-15ish friends that had cars all but 1 crashed in the first year. If i owned an insurance company i wouldn't touch any of them with a barge pole.

I replyed with a solid thought out point, because thats what i try to do before i hit, "post a topic" or "reply"

unfortunately you've just completely missed my point. I was saying I dont think it's a completely shit topic, because it's something that some people will have different views on and that's the whole point of a forum, surely? Like I said in my first post, I don't think it's discrimination and I'm agreeing with you on that.

All Boswell wanted to do was find out peoples opinions on it, and you gave him one - which is the point. All I'm saying is that that fact alone means that it's not a shit topic, because if it was that shit you wouldn't have had anything to say about it. Geddit?

[Pashley26]

I think the one about capping the forum should get special attention.

Edit - Speaking of Attention, I wonder if thats why he makes the Topics.

Because he posted the "Capping the forum" one in NMC, obviously to get a stronger reaction. Because if it was posted in Chit Chat, it would have been reported and closed in seconds due to the massive amounts of piss taking that would have entailed.

Edited September 16, 2008 by Pashley26

[Simpson]

Why do car insurers get away with discriminating? I am a disabled driver/student/teacher. Doing several quotes I found that tescos don't like to insure disabled people, everyone charges more if you're disabled.

Who does he think he is? Tesco's statisticians arn't sitting there thinking.. oh we don't like disabled people they're all f**king retards lets charge them more. No insurance companys will offer you different quotes and thats why its best looking arround, its not a case of "not liking disabled people" its a case of speciallity and risk assesment

everyone charges more if you have a penis...

He's diverted the point totally, in his rage he's decided to appeal to a wider audience by bringing gender into it. Lads are more likley to cause bigger crashes... fact again undeniable

Why don't they ask my skin colour?

Whey hey hey! Why not bring race into this already sham of a complaints letter just to mix thing up and be on the edge of being PC? Does skin colour really have as much of an influence as being disabled and perhaps because of your condition be more accident prone? i.e. slower to react, on medication with sideaffects? not being able to drive an convensional car etc. no.

what kind of underwear I wear?

Wow... really showing maturity there throwing all his toys out his pram

OK, it's done on statistics, and statistically male disabled drivers are seemingly statistically more of a risk.

Yea so you pay more you f**king numpty

Why am i discriminated against?

See you above point the sentance before

Would I be charged less if I had a sex change?

No, but im sure you would get in the papers for paying a lot of money on a sex-change just to get cheaper insurance

What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty? Don't laws stand for insurance companies, or is it that they have too much money to be perused?

Innocent until proven guilty? What the f**k, insurance is a gamble they hedge the odd's of you having a crash just like a bookie. Your welcombe to drive uninsured mate but thats illegal, and that is the law. No point having a crash saying "oh ok im guilty" and then asking to pay for insurance

Turning the tables; If women were charged more than men, the court case would have been done and dusted. Why is it that the feminist groups don't jump on the equal rights for car insurance??

Becuase its not equal is it? to use your quote again, "OK, it's done on statistics, and statistically male disabled drivers are seemingly statistically more of a risk" just makes you sound like a total tool.

Also, given that they are allowed to discriminate between men, women, age, location, job, health etc.

Edited September 16, 2008 by Simps

[Papa Manual]

Who does he think he is? Tesco's statisticians arn't sitting there thinking.. oh we don't like disabled people they're all f**king retards lets charge them more. No insurance companys will offer you different quotes and thats why its best looking arround, its not a case of "not liking disabled people" its a case of speciallity and risk assesment

Just to be a pedant, I would put money on the fact that Tesco don't employ statisticians. I'm guessing it's outsourced, just plain bought or PIKed.

[Simpson]

Just to be a pedant, I would put money on the fact that Tesco don't employ statisticians. I'm guessing it's outsourced, just plain bought or PIKed.

No becuase Tesco is just a broker who will hand deals to the real insurance companys, Like when i insured my motorbike through carle nash, i was actually insured on red stripe insurance or something. But still statisticians pay a major role

[JD™]

this is why its a shit topic

I give up.

No, wait. I will after this:

You're being a complete f'in numpty at the moment.

• Boswell didn't make any of those points
• Boswell never said whether he agreed with the sentiments of what he quoted
• Boswell does post a lot of shit topics, but this one would have been valid if you and "Gok Wan" hadn't jumped all over it within 3 seconds.
• If you READ what I've already said, you will see I f**kING AGREE WITH YOU about the text that Boswell quoted.

Now I give up.

[Simpson]

I did read what you put... i just fail to understand how this could ever have been a credible topic

[1a2bcio8]

Anything Boswell has posted before I've typically found more interesting than the people who are complaining about this thread.

He certainly gets a discussion going and one that's typically more intelligent that I normally otherwise see on here.

Going against my philosophical disposition, maybe I should say you're "shit" at recognising "shit".

edit: don't close the thread Boswell, ignore those individuals who enjoy putting down others yet can't create such similar things.

Edited September 16, 2008 by Ben Rowlands

[Nick Manning]

Anything Boswell has posted before I've typically found more interesting than the people who are complaining about this thread.

He certainly gets a discussion going and one that's typically more intelligent that I normally otherwise see on here.

Going again my philosophical disposition, maybe I should say you're "shit" at recognising "shit".

edit: don't close the thread Boswell, ignore those individuals who enjoy putting down others yet can't create such similar things.

Typical thinking by Ben.

I've read the thread and can see where both parties are coming from.

I was having a similar discussion with my gf's dad yesterday about discrimination and statistics. He's a retired Police inspector and was making points about the fact that discrimination has now gotten to a point that you can['t really say anything without someone over hearing and claiming that your being discriminating. The only way it's not discrimination is when statistics and facts prove otherwise.

So in this case insurance companies are discriminating against people, HOWEVER it's based on facts that a 17 yr old male is going to speed and have an accident compared to a 17 yr old girl.

It's all facts and figures.

[Extreme_biker0]

Just to be a pedant, I would put money on the fact that Tesco don't employ statisticians. I'm guessing it's outsourced, just plain bought or PIKed.

Just to be a pedant (and possibly also a satirist!), maybe they employ Actuarys to do the role you're describing instead.

As for the topic; what's wrong with it? Simps absolutely ripped it to pieces, but to be honest I prefer this topic to Simps latest unintellectual contribution of 'Post a pic of ur missus'. Oh and trying to rub salt into the wound Simps by saying it's been ripped to pieces by someone who's only 18 was a bit far-fetched; Boswell is 17.

The topic of mis-pricing of risk (albeit mainly credit) is actually very apt given the affairs of the day (AIG, Lehmen Bros, our own HBOS).

Edited September 16, 2008 by Extreme_biker0

[Papa Manual]

I would put twice the money on the fact Tescos don't have a single actuary on their pay role!!

[Extreme_biker0]

No seriously, you're topics are f**king shit.

Your topics are all amazing.

Wait, no, you contribute f**k all!