Motor 70+ plus year old refused motor insurance quote

T

Toto

Registered User
Messages
50
Today I tried to add my Dad as a additional driver on my motor policy. My broker said that, as he was 72, the company with which I am insured would not do it. They do not insure anyone over the age of 70.

My only option seems to be to cancel the entire policy and start elsewhere with someone who does not discriminate against age.

Can they do really do this in these enlightened times? Surely they are legally required to provide a quotation?
 
Well, he wasn't really refused in his own right, merely refused as a named driver, even though you mention the company doesn't insure any over 70's...

If he was looking in his own right and he got three refusals he can go to the insurance federation and, upon presenting evidence of companies refusing to quote, the federation will force the first company to provide a quote.. don't know if this helps...
 
it doesnt for named drivers. Because they arent obliged to provide cover for him.
 
Thanks. And I'm glad I asked, before I was roaring down the phone at someone.
 
They are not legally required to allow you to add additional drivers but they cannot discriminate on age alone without adequate proof that there was a good reason for doing so. Are you insured with one of the big companies in Ireland? I would be amazed if any of them were trying to do this as it is blatant age discrimination that they could easily be sued over. I would tell them that it is against the Equal Status Act to discriminate on the grounds of age alone and get their refusal in writing. Again, I would be really surprised if this was widespread amongst the big insurers here.
 
I don't think it is age discrimination...

Insurance companies 'discriminate' on grounds of gender, house location, parking location and age.. but they say they have the stats to back it up..

Some companies refuse to quote for younger drivers... some may refuse to quote for provisional drivers, some companies I believe refuse to quote if you live in certain estates... (the last one may be an urban myth)

Stats can be used to 'prove' anything... what I mean is that I'd say diferent colour cars have different claim rates, so they could in principle charge different amounts depending on the colour of your car, or your hair, or the type of pet you have...

Can any mathemathicans say if they'd expect any statisically important differences in claim rates depending on things like colour of car, or hair, or type of pet, ... as the insurance companies say there are statisically important differences when it comes to gender or age?...
If so, I think a case could be made that the insurance companies are choosing which criteria they use to discriminate on, and if they chose different criteria then different people would have to pay the higher premiums and other people would have their premiums reduced...
 
Just found a found a case from 2003, Ross v Royal Sun Alliance, where the plaintiff won on grounds of age discrimination.

See case 2 of link:

http://www.equality.ie/index.asp?locID=209&docID=278

"Royal and Sun Alliance's policy had no regard to the Declined Cases Agreement which specifically states 'No insurer shall decline a risk on the grounds of age of driver alone' "

The only information I supplied about my father was his age, period for which license held (40+ yrs), endorsements (none ever) and claims (none ever). The only reason they refused to quote therefore was his age.

I am not insured with RSA, but I'm sure that all insurers must adhere to 'No insurer shall decline a risk on the grounds of age of driver alone'

However there are very broad exemptions that allow insurance companies to discriminate where the difference in the treatment of persons "is effected by reference to actuarial data obtained from a source on which it is reasonable to rely, or other relevant underwriting or commercial factors, and is reasonable having regard to the data or other relevant factors".

This is what they attempt to rely on, but it didn't work in the case of Ross.
 
Toto said:
"Royal and Sun Alliance's policy had no regard to the Declined Cases Agreement which specifically states 'No insurer shall decline a risk on the grounds of age of driver alone' "

This is what they attempt to rely on, but it didn't work in the case of Ross.
Click to expand...

The argument is different. The declined cases agreement and this point refers to the owner/insurer of the car - not a named driver! Which is what you are attempting to do here.
 
Toto to strengthen your case get the insurance company to quote with all the same details but use a different age for your Dad as named driver say 65.

There is no problem with a company refusing cover for certain reasons but just because it's ok at 69 and not at 70 is age discrimination.
 
OP IMHO your thread title is misleading. I think it would be helpful if you change it to reflect the reality of the discussion e.g. "Insurer refuses to add 72-year-old named driver to motor policy"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top