GEICO discriminates people on the basis of their profession

Message Author
ampm-bookmark
delicious-small Add to delicious
yahoomyweb-small Add to YahooMyWeb
blinklist-small Add to BlinkList
PostPosted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 9:09 am   Post subject: GEICO discriminates people on the basis of their profession  

Hi !



Many of us must have noticed the recent reports of some minor clashes been depicted in some eminent websites highlighting the differences between the Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRKa)(NYSE: BRKb) unit GEICO against the Consumer Federation of America (CFA) and the not-for-profit insurance agency New Jersey Citizens United Reciprocal Exchange (NJ CURE).



The CFA and the NJ CURE have recently questioned the basis of the risk-assessment policies of several insurance companies carrying a lot of goodwill in the world market.



These efforts are mainly directed to establish an appeal to the state governments in order to effect a ban on the insurance practices that relate the consumers' eligibility and premium amounts to their educational background and occupation. Some of the notable companies like GEICO have been blamed of charging different rates to people from different professional streams and this has been backed with records of the different quotes offered by the company. This might be very important at throwing some light upon the insurance hazards faced by the minorities, since the minorities mostly occupy the low paid jobs. But then again as we analyze deeper into the problem we have only education and occupation as the factors contributing to GEICO's discriminations. We are yet to track down the other factors, since CFA and NJ CURE are yet to discover them. Once the CFA and NJ CURE have raised interesting questions about the proceedings and intentions of GEICO, they have also submitted the underwriting guidelines of their target to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC).



Now, it has become all the more important for us to see if NAIC would consider this argument or dismiss it !


_________________
Register Now to have your Insurance queries solved.
April Tidwell
Guest







PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 9:12 am   Post subject: underwrting  

guidelines of good underwriting

FELLY
New member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Posts: 3


1.95 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 5:10 pm   Post subject:   

Yup... and discriminating based on credit history (read, fiancial backgrounds) should be made illegal also. While all of these things affect the number of claims people file, they don't have one thing to do with exposure or insurance specifically.

tcope
Forum Expert
Leave a quick message

tcope
Forum Expert

Joined: 22 Nov 2006
Posts: 6175

Location: Salt Lake City, UT
375.37 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 12:57 am   Post subject:   

I don't agree with the credit check thing at all, it should go on your driving history and your past insurance history. If you file a ton of claims then maybe you are a candidate for the higher premium, but what the heck does your credit tell them about your driving history.



About the job issue, don't get that either, so the ones in the lower paying jobs that would have a hard time affording insurance will pay higher rates, ok now that is just crazy.



Discrimination, I would say YES, what is their reasoning for this, would like to hear their reasoning.

August
Preferred member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 100


0.02 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 2:35 pm   Post subject:   

I also think that raising the rates for a persons job if dumb. It is hard enough to afford the rates without that .What is even worse is doing the credit check .If you have bad credit you pay higher rates? Ridiculous!Thats like say"You are having a hard time paying your rates so i am going to raise it and make it harder" what a joke. Why not just check on the claims through previous insurance they have had and if it is over a minimum ,THEN put them in high risk .This would be much easier for people to understand than the other stuff.

hummingbird
Senior member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 04 Dec 2007
Posts: 609


3.57 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 1:07 pm   Post subject:   

I agree, thing is what can people do about it?

August
Preferred member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 100


0.02 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 1:12 pm   Post subject:   

Quote:
I also think that raising the rates for a persons job if dumb.
UNLESS we are talking about health, and more importantly life policys.


_________________

"Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way." Martin Luther King Jr.
Lori
Forum Expert
Leave a quick message

Lori
Forum Expert

Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 8080

Location: Missouri
287.93 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 2:08 am   Post subject:   

Yes, it would make sense to look at a person's job if it was a health policy.But auto? I just got a letter in the mail yesterday from a company I have never heard of for auto insurance.here is a statement on the letter(College Education Discount- From our experience,we know college graduates are better drivers.(says who?) That's why we offer a special discount of up tp 10% if you have a Bachelor's degree.) How rediculous is that? That should be against the law. Sounds like discrimination to me.

hummingbird
Senior member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 04 Dec 2007
Posts: 609


3.57 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 1:25 pm   Post subject:   

Quote:
College Education Discount- From our experience,we know college graduates are better drivers.(says who?) That's why we offer a special discount of up tp 10% if you have a Bachelor's degree.) How rediculous is that? That should be against the law. Sounds like discrimination to me.
I agree I have a colleged degreed kid and one with a high school dipolma only, the college degreed one is a WAY worse driver than the highschool kid! They won't be hung with discrimination, it's called profiling I think though...or underwriting doubt any problems will arise for them on this....course no question....a person under the age of 25 typically is a lot greater risk (worse driver) than say a fourty or fifty year old


_________________

"Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way." Martin Luther King Jr.
Lori
Forum Expert
Leave a quick message

Lori
Forum Expert

Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 8080

Location: Missouri
287.93 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 2:04 pm   Post subject:   

You have to remember that there's not a lot of profit margin (year after year) with auto insurance. Credit record actually is a good indicator of driving.



And I hate to say it, but if it could be proven that people with moles on their left arm were better drivers....then guess what? There would be a discount for it.



It's just a matter of time until there is a surcharge for people who are either going through a divorce or just had one. Their incidence of accident is clearly higher (proven fact). Not that I agree with that.



The top five life changing events are:



Death of a child



Death of spouse



Death of parent or sibling



Divorce



Separation from spouse due to work or marital difficulties



Again, I, personally don't think we should surcharge for these events...but there is a direct correlation between these five and higher incidents of accidents.

OhioHealthInsurance
Preferred member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 09 Feb 2008
Posts: 179

Location: Midwest
3.18 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 4:17 pm   Post subject:   

Quote:
That's why we offer a special discount of up tp 10% if you have a Bachelor's degree.) How rediculous is that? That should be against the law. Sounds like discrimination to me.
I see nothing wrong with this and it's different in that its a _discount_, not an increased rate. I have no problem if carriers want to charge a fair rate to many people and offer discounts to others. That is really not discrimination.



Quote:
Credit record actually is a good indicator of driving.
Actually the two have _nothing_ to do with each other and there are _no_ indicators that they do. Give me _1_ example of how these might be related. You won't be able to. What you _might_ say is that this group of people file more claims. That is not being disputed but is not the same thing (see my post above).



Yet another state is trying to make rating a policy on credit history illegal.
tcope
Forum Expert
Leave a quick message

tcope
Forum Expert

Joined: 22 Nov 2006
Posts: 6175

Location: Salt Lake City, UT
375.37 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 6:02 pm   Post subject:   

Lori, Did I read that right? I thought you said you agreed with what the letter said,about college kids being better drivers but at the same time I thought you said your college kid was a way worse driver than yor kid who on had a high school diploma. Did I read that right?

hummingbird
Senior member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 04 Dec 2007
Posts: 609


3.57 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 6:11 pm   Post subject:   

Quote:
The top five life changing events are:



Death of a child

Death of spouse

Death of parent or sibling

Divorce

Separation from spouse due to work or marital difficulties



Again, I, personally don't think we should surcharge for these events...but there is a direct correlation between these five and higher incidents of accidents.
Even if that were correct, so few people (when compared to the insured masses) suffer from these losses _and_ are involved in accidents that it's really not a driving factor when it comes to risk. Compare these things with; speeding, DUI, age, etc. and you can see that they have little influence in a grand scheme of things.



(again, I question how _direct_ an influence these things have on _auto accidents_. I've never seen any study that shows it makes worst drivers for any significant amount of time.
tcope
Forum Expert
Leave a quick message

tcope
Forum Expert

Joined: 22 Nov 2006
Posts: 6175

Location: Salt Lake City, UT
375.37 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 6:41 pm   Post subject:   

True...not for any significant period of time. But definitely for a period of 1-18 months. Just like driving while talking on a cell phone. No way to enforce that, but there is no doubt that there is an increased risk of an accident while talking on a cell phone.



And here are some other situations (while driving) that increase the likelihood that you will have an accident.



*If you are Roger Clemons and listen to what the average fan is saying about you.



*If you are driving to the bank to cash your winning lottery check from Nigeria.



If you suddenly realized you were supposed to drive to Detroit, and not Cleveland, and you were just passing Toledo.



If you were trying to post this message on your cellphone while driving.

OhioHealthInsurance
Preferred member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 09 Feb 2008
Posts: 179

Location: Midwest
3.18 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 12:37 am   Post subject:   

I think a lot of times it is just targeted advertising, all types of companies pull this type of advertising. As Lori says, the real discounts start kicking in after the age of 25.

goodnatured
Senior member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 04 Nov 2007
Posts: 1222


1.14 Dollars($)

Quick Reply
Your Name
Subject
Message body
All times are GMT
1, 2, 3  Next  
Page 1 of 3


Get a Quote
Ask Community Experts

flash plugin

Quick Links

Must See

Community

Hot topics in forums

Latest in blogs

    Connection Error: Connection refused