Posted On: April 3, 2007, 11:51 am CDT

Posted By: Mark P

So Alex Cink says "Rates should be fair and based only on actual risk" and yet in the same article it's stated that this puts other companies that don't use occupation/education at a "disadvantage". Would it be a disadvantage because companies that use it have discovered lower loss costs and companies that don't use it will attract customers with higher loss costs? Seems like that makes it a relevant factor to me. What is an "actual risk" anyway? Alex Cink throws the terminology around loosely and she certainly doesn't know what it means. Here's why it's fair: it's not race based, the insured has control over this underwriting variable, and it gives us all the chance to aspire to the lowest rate level available. Why don't we remove the current underwritng variables that the public can't control: age & gender. The auto market is highly competitive. The Fl OIR is determined to ruin it.