This article is in London Stock Exchange.com. And it shows the interfering and socialist, central control tendencies of the EU.
Central control tendencies which appear to have no interest the well-being of the citizens. This “discrimination” law is a case in point. It is now illegal for insurance companies to give women cheaper insurance because they are safer drivers.
Women now have to pay the same insurance costs as men. This is only going to lead to one thing, higher car insurance premiums for women. Of course there is no way mens insurance casts are going to come down to the same level as car insurance for women so you can rest assured that female car insurance will be increasing next year and you can thank the EU for this.
However, is giving women cheaper insurance really discriminatory? Lets look at what discrimination actually means. From Wikipedia
Discrimination is the prejudicial treatment of an individual based on their membership – or perceived membership – in a certain group or category
So discrimination is the act of treating someone negatively because of the group or category they belong to. Cheaper car insurance is not a negative thing, it is a positive. I suppose you could say okay, describe it another way, men pay more for their car insurance because they are men. Okay, but is that really discrimination?
Again from the Wikipedia article of a definition of discrimination
Moral philosophers have defined discrimination as disadvantageous treatment or consideration. This is a comparative definition. An individual need not be actually harmed in order to be discriminated against. He or she just needs to be treated worse than others for some arbitrary reason.
The key word here being arbitrary – from Southampton University
Arbitrary means anything that does not depend on any system, logic, or criterion.
From the Free Dictionary
Insurance business in Britain is set for the biggest shake-up in the generations following a European ruling that is not right to give women the best rates for auto coverage than men.
The measure, which will come into force in December 2012, means that insurance companies must radically change their pricing methods, which are often based on the gender of the customer.
“Taking the sex of the individual insured account as a risk factor in insurance constitutes discrimination”, the European Court of Justice has ruled.
The decision requires an angry response from the insurance industry, who said the decision could mean that women end up paying 25% more for insurance.
Three million motorists in the UK women are aged below 30, the group most likely to be affected.
Men in same age group could see lower premiums, even if the group is statistically more dangerous drivers. Older drivers will see variations of smaller prizes.
“At European level the effect on price and performance, and the choice of insurance products to consumers could be significant,” said Michaela Koller, director general of the European insurance and reinsurance federation.
The ruling could also reduce pensions for men, who receive more than women because of their lower life expectancy.
The search for the Association of British Insurers (ABI) found that male annuity rates could drop by about 8% if insurers can no longer provide the lowest life expectancy of men when calculate annuity rates.
This equates to approximately £ 500 per year less for a man aged 65 with £ 100,000 in his retirement. Women of similar age could see their pensions rise of £ 400 a year.
The industry also expects the life insurance become more expensive for women and less expensive for men. Women may see an increase of as much as 20% of the cost of cover, while men could see a decline of 10%, ABI estimates.
“This prohibition is generally a disappointing news for UK consumers and something the insurance industry in the UK has struggled for the last decade. The judgment ignores the fact that taking a person’s gender into account, where relevant for risk, enables men and women to get a more accurate price for their insurance, “Maggie Craig, ABI acting Director General said.
How the ruling may apply to existing life insurance is something that is taxing the ABI, which is in talks with the Treasury and the Financial Services Authority on how they intend to implement the judgment.
Because of the uncertainty, insurers may decide to change their annuity rates soon to cover the possibility of a bill for heavy-discrimination claims on life policies exist.
This page was last modified
Get our WEEKLY email with the highlight video & news articles from the last 7 days.
Check out our previous Newsletters