EU Gender ruling (effective from December 2012) expected to affect many-some facts.

[MARTIN3030]

ECJ Gender directive.

 

 

 

Background.

 

Draft Directive on Equal Treatment

 

On 2 July 2008, under its ‘Renewed Social Agenda’, the European Commission adopted a non discrimination

package including a proposal for a new directive on equal treatment. This proposal prohibits discrimination on

grounds of age, disability, sexual orientation and religion or belief outside the employment sphere, in the areas

of social protection, including social security and health care; education; and access to and supply of goods and

services which are commercially available to the public, including housing and transport.

 

The new directive would come on top of four other directives; one on discrimination based on racial or ethnic

origin, both within and outside the labour market; one on discrimination in the labour market; one on equal

treatment between men and women as regards access to employment; and one on equal treatment between men

and women as regards access to and supply of goods and services.

 

On the 2nd April 2009 the proposed directive was adopted by the European Parliament.

 

The Government Equalities Office ran a 12 week public consultation from 5 May to 28 July in 2009 on the

Commission’s Proposal. It has since published a summary of the responses.

 

Negotiations on the Directive are continuing in Europe.

 

Gender Directive

 

Article 5(2) of the Gender Directive allows Member States to permit differences relating to gender in respect of

insurance premiums and benefits if gender is a determining risk factor and that can be substantiated by relevant,

accurate, and regularly updated actuarial and statistical data.

 

st

On 1 March 2011,in its final ruling on the Test Achats case regarding the opt out in Article 5(2) of the Gender

Directive2004 the European Court of Justice(ECJ)declared Article 5(2) to be void with effect from 21

December 2012. As of this date, all Member States must consider the provision to be invalid. The ruling

applies from December 2012,however its impact on insurance contracts concluded prior to this date and on

those that remain in force beyond it is not yet clear.

 

Test Achats, the Belgian Consumer Association, originally brought their case, before the Belgian Constitutional

Court in 2009. They argued that the opt out provision in Article 5(2) was contrary to the principle of gender

equality as enshrined in primary Community law, and in particular to article 6(2) of the Treaty on European

Union**. The Belgian Constitutional Court referred the case to the ECJ.

 

The Advocate General gave her opinion to the ECJ on 30 September 2010 that the derogation should be

annulled.

 

 

 

IMPLICATIONS;

 

Car Insurance,Over a long period,Insurers calculated premiums based on whether a driver was male or female.although statics showed that there was little difference in the amount of accidents occurred between women and men,there is evidence to show that costs to address incidents by women for the Insurers were significantly less.

Young and new drivers are expected to be hit the hardest and already face high premiums.

Traditionally,drivers with no history gave women an upper hand as they were rated as a lower risk than male drivers.

A report from one leading Insurance company in July 2012,has revealed that insurance for a new male driver averaged £1060 more than that of a female in the 17-25 age group.

The new ruling means that this mode of decision making will be unlawful.

It is expected that young womens policies will rise,whilst young mens will fall slightly,and could see a 10% benefit.

 

Young women meanwhile could face increases of up to 25%.

As the December deadline approaches,It is a good idea for those women likely to be affected to sort out policies ASAP.

Another way of softening the blow is for drivers to consider telematics (Black Box technology)

which give scope for young drivers to prove their abilities as safe drivers,and enjoy discounts as a result.

 

LIFE INSURANCE

 

The ruling is likely to impact on life and health insurance too,since women have longer life expectancy than men.

Whilst there is not much information available at the moment,it is accepted that womens premiums are expected to rise,although not by the 25% expected in the case of young womens car insurance premiums.Index linked or guaranteed policies are unlikely to be affected.

Variable premiums however,could see an increase or decrease.

Some experts are suggesting that those with variable policies should think about switching to a fixed one,but consider that prices could go either way.

As always The CAG suggests that you seek independent expert advise before making any decisions.

 

 

HEALTH INSURANCE

 

Little changes are forecast,since women and men already pay similar rates,although women could see a small drop in payments for Income Protection Policies,which pay out for sickness,with men seeing a slight rise in policy payments.

Looking around for a better policy before December is an option for those who think they may benefit.

Edited October 5, 2012 by MARTIN3030

[dacouc]

With regard to car Insurance, bear in mind that Insurers really do prefer young females, they're likely to have been reducing their premiums for females by extra amounts prior to December 2012 in order to bulk their customer bases out with females balance the extra risk of the male drivers. They will hope will renew the following years at the gender equivalent premiums.

[MARTIN3030]

Meanwhile Sheilas' Wheels who offer Insurance for women have pledged to keep any increases to a minimum

 

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/oct/10/sheilas-wheels-car-insurance

[unclebulgaria67]

If the Insurers managed to deal with all the dodgy claims they received, then they could keep premiums at a reasonable level for all genders.

 

Government, Insurers and Police should get together to see what they could do.

 

I witnessed the after events of a minor accident the other day. There appeared to be absolutely no damage to either car, but both drivers were swapping their Insurance details. I could see the driver of the car which had been bumped from behind with almost a smile on their face and eyes with cash registers showing. They were walking around the car, looking at it from underneath the back bumper to see if there were any cracks, dents etc. So no signs of any injury I bet that they will see their GP in the coming days complaining of a stiff neck and get a note so they can pursue a claim.

 

Unfortunately, I think there are a good percentage of people who now see every minor accident as a way to earn some money.

[MARTIN3030]

Yes.

I think the average whiplash claim is 2k.