What the hell is the EU doing now?

In March, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) told insurers to stop charging men and women different premiums from 2012, which will lead to better deals for women who buy annuities and cheaper cover for young male drivers.

A similar ban on using age to calculate premiums would cut the cost of travel insurance for older people, who often pay much more than younger travellers.

Following the ECJ\’s decision on sex-based pricing, the EU may decide not to exempt the insurance industry from new laws on age discrimination, lawyers have said. Such a decision would affect other types of insurance. For example, young drivers could see their premiums cut.

Insurance is based on actuarial principles.

In other words, slicing and dicing the population into discrete chunks each of whom can be charged different prices. For they have different likelihoods of claiming on said insurance.

Is it that the people in Brussels don\’t care about  how insurance works? Don\’t know? Or actively want to destroy it?

What next? Life insurance for 90 year olds must cost the same as it does for 20 year olds?

And no, don\’t laugh, they\’ve already done something just as stupid with annuities for men and women.

 

7 thoughts on “What the hell is the EU doing now?”

  1. Questions to which the answer is: Trying to fuck up everyone’s lives and destroy freedom in a way so efficient as to make Hitler jealous.

  2. The EU is not banning actuarial principles in insurance. The Equal Treatment Directive specifically allows for member states to permit exemptions where actuarial data suggests a clear difference between genders (as Gareth posted here a couple of months ago). The same’ll be true for age where it counts – life insurance and annuities – but not where it doesn’t -travel cancellation.

  3. So Ambrose by default the EU directive does ban actuarial principles in insurance. A government has to specifically opt out, but is only allowed to do so in certain areas. Whose to say the meddling parasites have got it right about which areas don’t count. For example perhaps older people are more likely to cancel trips because they get ill more often. At the very least it is going to introduce a whole new totally unnecessary layer of bureaucracy. Off with their heads – after an extended period of torture of course.

  4. Ian, um no. You can apply actuarial principles when they go against a principle of fair treatment, where you can show actuarial principles apply. That is, actually mean something. Make a difference. Not complicated. When you (I mean the industry and government plonkers who screwed this up) can’t even be arsed to demonstrate what you believe to be the bleeding obvious, you get stuck. But then they can blame “Brussels.”

  5. See, I can see both sides on it. Young men are now charged significantly more than young women, so much so that ‘driving without insurance’ is becoming a bigger problem as it’s basically unaffordable, and then you get an IN10, which increases premium costs, so it becomes unaffordable, etc.

    But we know from actual Skience that it’s not being young and male, it’s testosterone levels–most younger men have high testosterone levels, some don’t, most younger women don’t have high testosterone levels, some do (my fiancée was a research guinea pig while at university, she was in the ‘very high levels’ bracket).

    It’s the testosterone that drives the stupid behaviour, not the young man thing.

    Some insurers have been lazy in some respects, and the EU passed a law, several years ago, that would make them stop being lazy. They didn’t renew some exemptions recently, and those exemptions were always time limited.

    Basically, everyone in this has been crap. But it shouldn’t just be a ‘blame the EU’ thing, no one pushed for the renewal of the exemption, the insurers should’ve noticed that one. And some insurers, seriously, incredibly lazy in their actuary methods. If they’d not been so lazy and kept up with the actual numbers, then the pressure to force them to change wouldn’t have existed.

    Crap solution to stupid problem. Quel surprise.

  6. So Much For Subtlety

    ambrose murphy – “The EU is not banning actuarial principles in insurance. The Equal Treatment Directive specifically allows for member states to permit exemptions where actuarial data suggests a clear difference between genders (as Gareth posted here a couple of months ago).”

    So how will this directive have any impact? Presumably annuities are already market driven and hence do not discriminate without cause. It is just another useless layer of box ticking and bureaucracy everyone has to go through, no? As well as taking power from private companies and giving it to States.

Leave a Reply

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