What? Women Pay More Than Men for Auto Insurance? Yup.

By Elaine S. Povich | February 12, 2019

  • February 12, 2019 at 1:33 pm
    craig cornell says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 28
    Thumb down 9

    From the article:

    “In an interview, Jones said it’s fair for insurance companies to set premiums based on a driver’s accident history, number of speeding tickets and other factors that are under the driver’s control. But using gender is unfair because a person has no control over that, he said.”

    Sounds real cool. But I can’t help my testosterone making me drive fast, Mr. Jones, so please don’t hold my speeding tickets against me. It was just how I was born! Also, I was born with ADD, so don’t hold my running of stop lights against me, I was thinking about how the Saints got screwed and didn’t see the light.

    Maybe women text more than men, causing distracted driving overall. Maybe women have kids in the car, causing further distractions. After all, women and men ARE different in many ways, including different hormones, according to science.

    So Mr. Jones, do you think actuaries are sexist? Racist? Or just people who look at the numbers?

    • February 12, 2019 at 2:29 pm
      Agent says:
      Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 8
      Thumb down 21

      Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

      • February 12, 2019 at 3:35 pm
        Rosenblatt says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 25
        Thumb down 8

        Your comment was good until you took an unprovoked swipe at your fellow Americans.

      • February 12, 2019 at 4:45 pm
        SWFL Agent says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 9
        Thumb down 3

        “Special Agent?” – are you 90?

    • February 12, 2019 at 4:19 pm
      Jack King says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 29
      Thumb down 0

      If the rating factors show that women have more accidents than men, why is that not a fair rating basis? If is a fact. Teenagers, regardless of sex, pay more for insurance. Does the governor of California think that is fair? It’s not their fault they’re young! It’s a dumb argument by the governor, and further shows why politicians shouldn’t be allowed to interfere with business practices that are sound.

      • February 12, 2019 at 4:52 pm
        SWFL Agent says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 16
        Thumb down 2

        All makes sense Jack. But politicians, like lawyers, are masters at selling the concept – “it’s not your fault, you’re a victim, and we’re gonna make somebody else pay for it”.

      • February 13, 2019 at 1:32 pm
        Yup says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 6
        Thumb down 2

        Then go further, include race. Do asian women deserve to pay the most, lets include that into the factors on the computer that just “spit out the number”.

  • February 12, 2019 at 1:57 pm
    Actuary says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 17
    Thumb down 0

    These studies seem to think that gender is the primary rating variables used in auto rating when it is only one piece of the whole rating plan. Large companies such as the ones listed in the graphics have extremely complex rating plans that include gender but also a multitude of other variables.

    Since most plans have the factors related to gender set lower for women than men, the rate difference is due to anything except gender. Female drivers must be more likely to have other negative attributes in the rating plan than men to get these rate differentials. Instead of looking at gender, look at other variables and see if they are fair.

  • February 12, 2019 at 4:52 pm
    Perplexed says:
    Hot debate. What do you think?
    Thumb up 17
    Thumb down 16

    I’m surprised that he made the statement that we have no control over our gender. Don’t libs believe that you can pick your gender? If I had known being female is increasing my auto premiums I might choose to be a man…for auto insurance only, of course.

  • February 12, 2019 at 4:54 pm
    Perplexed says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 10
    Thumb down 0

    I’m so old I can remember company guidelines excluding divorced people because they were more prone to accidents.

    • February 13, 2019 at 3:32 pm
      FFA says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 0

      I dont remember that and I am an old timer too. I remember when carriers thought Single moms were more responsible just because they had a kid.

    • February 14, 2019 at 3:14 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 5
      Thumb down 4

      Perplexed, remember when senior drivers were given discounts for being safe drivers? That has gradually gone away and now seniors are surcharged on their rates when many are on fixed incomes. Still safe drivers with hardly ever a claim, pay their bills and this is their reward. Very tough for an agent to explain that to the customer.

      • February 15, 2019 at 9:58 am
        Ron says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 7
        Thumb down 2

        It’s scary that, as a seasoned agent, you still do not know how rates are generated and/or how to explain the insurance mechanism to your clients. If loss costs are increasing for seniors, that means they are becoming less safe as a class. Therefor, they should pay more.

        This isn’t rocket science.

        Have you noticed how the insurance cycle has stabilized since the use of predictive modeling and algorithms have become the industry norm?

  • February 12, 2019 at 6:24 pm
    CO_yeti says:
    Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 4
    Thumb down 14

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    • February 12, 2019 at 8:56 pm
      Craig Cornell says:
      Hot debate. What do you think?
      Thumb up 13
      Thumb down 8

      A PC comment masquerading as technical savvy. Nice!

      • February 14, 2019 at 5:35 pm
        CO_yeti says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 4
        Thumb down 1

        I don’t think it was masquerading, I was fairly blunt.

      • February 19, 2019 at 12:44 pm
        Agent says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 1

        Craig, Ron’s buddy Andrew is still censoring my posts.

  • February 13, 2019 at 6:16 pm
    FurriePrincess says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 1
    Thumb down 1

    Here is the CA Dept of Insurance Filing instructions for personal auto. http://www.insurance.ca.gov/0250-insurers/0800-rate-filings/upload/Class-Plan-Instructions041511.pdf The voter proposition 103 was passed in the late1980’s with implementation taking over 20 years to finally have all the elements in effect. So experience, miles driven and accidents/tickets are the major rating factors.

  • February 19, 2019 at 11:59 am
    mr opinion says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 2
    Thumb down 1

    It’s really simple. If, and ONLY if, a carrier can demonstrate a link between a given factor and risk that is statistically significant (and not just a red herring) they should be able to use it. They use location, occupation, credit, marital status, AND Gender, all things that go beyond driving history, to predict risk of future claims since an individual’s own driving record could never be long enough to mathematically predict future losses (anyone who took basic statistics courses knows this). Since this is the business insurance companies are in, they need ways to “lump” groups together, not for discrimination, but to create a sample large enough for statistically significant results. Everyone one of those factors has been attacked by one state or another as discriminatory. When they are done with that, they will attack the use of driving records based on something like, how frequently minorities get pulled over, to justify calling the use of MVR’s racist. This is all just a not so clever way of trying to socialize every industry so that everyone, regardless of risk factors pays the same. At that point, all carriers end up with the same rates and competition goes away. It’s scary that social fads now dictate economic policy. Here’s the new law, if you’re not an expert in the industry, don’t try to regulate it.

  • February 19, 2019 at 1:35 pm
    jestr says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 2
    Thumb down 0

    All I know is usually when I see an SUV tailgating me or driving way too fast 9 times out of 10 it’s a woman of the “soccer mom” caliber.

  • February 20, 2019 at 2:09 pm
    KS says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 2
    Thumb down 1

    I am a woman in my 60’s who had an accident 2 years ago [by the way, no accidents since 19 yrs old]. The woman who hit me was in her late 20’s or early 30’s and backed into my car out of a parking space.
    Bad news is she claimed it was my fault and we both had the same insurance company and they charged us both. When my insurance came due again, they wanted to charge me over $300. a year more.
    I switched companies.

    • February 21, 2019 at 1:12 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 0

      Some companies say that a ticket or accident will wash off in 3 years or so. When I got my renewal, they showed a not at fault UM claim I had in 2007. They say it doesn’t mean anything on the rating. If so, why show it? Still got a $200 rate increase on the renewal with no tickets, accidents, credit changes or anything else.

  • February 26, 2019 at 10:14 am
    RV says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 1
    Thumb down 0

    It was fine to discriminate when it was young men. The moment it is women(majority of voters) poof, we can’t have that. Men got in more accidents in the past, yeah they drove more. Now women drive as much as us, equality and all that. Looky looky, rates going up.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*