| |
Car Insurance -
Car Insurance: When Premiums Are Dependent on Age and Risks |
|
| |
| |
It’s no longer a big wonder that insurance companies hike the prices of car insurance premiums when dealing with younger drivers. Even when they have a licence that is very neat, having incurred no penalties after driving for a while, young drivers, it is generally believed by insurers, would be open to more risks, including motoring penalties.
While this assertion was assumed to be unproven or at least based on a few isolated cases, a recent survey has to a very large extent put to rest any contrary speculation. It has also confirmed that rather than arguing, as some are wont to, that most young drivers are punished for the sins of a few, they are indeed ‘birds of the same feather’.
The survey by Sainsbury’s Car Insurance this week revealed that drivers who fall between age range of 17 and 24, usually categorised as young drivers and given different and more expensive quotes by car insurers, were much more likely to drive without insurance than older drivers. This significantly strikes at the argument by some pundits, who in recent times have made it a big issue that young drivers are being penalised just because of their age. In a particular situation a comparative reference was made to Daniel Radcliffe who, in spite of leading a healthy, controversy-free life and driving a modest car with no past motoring convictions, pays a lot more than Pete Doherty, whose rock n roll lifestyle and controversies have always graced the front pages or leading stories of much of the British media.
In addition, Peter’s car is anything but modest. The argument then, which even saw experts decrying the unjust penalty on young faultless road users like Daniel, was why the likes of Peter with strings of convictions would pay less simply because they were a bit older.
Insurance companies had, perhaps, studied the different scenarios before coming up with the rules and whether one chooses to accept it as it or not, it is clear that young drivers, particular the male, would attract more insurance risks than their older or female counterparts. Evidences, relation to accidents and motoring penalties, abound to substantiate this claim. Often it’s the young male driver who would show off their driving expertise by over-speeding or making certain bizarre moves to impress others.
As this poll has proven, they are clearly in error and are deliberately doing so. This further gives a ‘food for thought’ for insurers and experts arguing for or against the higher premium young drivers pay on car insurance.
Although in fairness to young drivers they were not the only ones who admitted to getting behind the wheel without a cover, the survey showed they had the highest percentage (nearly two-fifth of participants). Next to them was also another group, a bit older but not as highly risky, who said they had driven without insurance – the 25-34.
When compared to much older drivers like the 55 to 64 year-olds, just one per cent of whom admitted to committing the offence, or the over 65s, who had less than a percentage, it doesn’t need any further debate on who represents greater risks of the three category of drivers, based on age criteria, to insurers.
Even as many young drivers, who have been dented by the acts of others, may still consider this a not so fair conclusion, they could still stand themselves out in their individual capacity. One good way to do this is to avoid any motoring penalties and their ‘no claim bonus’ would speak for them.
For those who continue to get on the road without insurance, the law is there to get them adequately penalised. Meanwhile, Sainsbury’s warns that uninsured drivers’ costs are helping to hike premiums by £25 to £30 for the average annual car insurance.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
