If you recieve speeding tickets or a DWI yes you should pay more because you ACTUALLY DID SOMETHING that caused your insurance to go up. Refusing to insure because you have a breed that is on some list is YES in my book DESCRIMINATION.If that particular person had been dropped from another company for having a dog bite complaint on that dog then OK YES I would say then to deny coverage is warranted but not if the dog has did nothing to warrant refusal. Would you be alright with your auto insurance going up because you MIGHT GET A SPEEDING TICKET say because you drive a particular kind of fast car. The answer would be NO I AM SURE!
Nikki, you just made my point. Regardless of my driving and/or claim history, my auto insurance WILL increase if I purchase a sports car. Are you saying all Porsche owners are discriminated against by their respective auto insurance companies? I agree, just because I drive a fast car does not mean that I am going to have an accident. Nor does the fact that I own German Shepard mean that I will submit a dog bite claim. Yet in both scenarios I would expect to bear higher insurance costs. This isn’t anything new to the industry, it is common practice. I understand the point you are making, that a broad-brush approach is not fair to everyone, but the fact remains, this is purely a business decision. A risk management type decision, common to many businesses, not just the insurance business.
LLCJ yes these are dogs not people however it is my RIGHT to own one of them. I would be the one descriminated against saying you wont insure me is the point I am making.
REad E&O Joe\’s post about acceptable discrimination. Especially the point about porsches.
Yes you have a right to own a dog. But you don\’t have the right to insurance. Your insurance company has the right to refuse you insurance because of your choices.
Are life insurers discriminating against smokers and charging them substantially higher rates? Are porsche owners discriminated against for driving fast cars? Are Florida residents discriminated against for living in hurricane prone areas?
Insurance is about risk. Dogs are risky. Therefore an insurance company has a right to minimize it\’s risk.
Obviously, you feel strongly about this issue. however, emotion cannot rule the day. Rules based on objective evidence and logic should govern the way a business does business.
Some carriers in NY are excluding certain breeds in their personal liability policy language just like some carriers exclude trampolines in their policy language.
I don\’t know if they have been tested in court yet.
I just rec\’d my Safeco auto renewal today. There are 4 cars on the policy…one of which is my 2005 Corvette (C6). My wife\’s 2000 BMW 7 series costs 8% more to insure than the Vette and the Vette has $500 Collision ded, as the LP will not accept the $1000 I carry on all the others. We both have identically clean records, same annual mileage, etc. (No tricks here, either… everything is as stated.) IMHO all sports cars are not created or rated equally, just as all dogs are not, or should be. (The C6 will run away from a 911, but is generally even with a 911S, too.)
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
If you recieve speeding tickets or a DWI yes you should pay more because you ACTUALLY DID SOMETHING that caused your insurance to go up. Refusing to insure because you have a breed that is on some list is YES in my book DESCRIMINATION.If that particular person had been dropped from another company for having a dog bite complaint on that dog then OK YES I would say then to deny coverage is warranted but not if the dog has did nothing to warrant refusal. Would you be alright with your auto insurance going up because you MIGHT GET A SPEEDING TICKET say because you drive a particular kind of fast car. The answer would be NO I AM SURE!
Nikki, you just made my point. Regardless of my driving and/or claim history, my auto insurance WILL increase if I purchase a sports car. Are you saying all Porsche owners are discriminated against by their respective auto insurance companies? I agree, just because I drive a fast car does not mean that I am going to have an accident. Nor does the fact that I own German Shepard mean that I will submit a dog bite claim. Yet in both scenarios I would expect to bear higher insurance costs. This isn’t anything new to the industry, it is common practice. I understand the point you are making, that a broad-brush approach is not fair to everyone, but the fact remains, this is purely a business decision. A risk management type decision, common to many businesses, not just the insurance business.
Yup. That will work.
Sure.
Call the Donald. Maybe he can help too? While we\’re at it, call Bill Gates.
The problem with Jeff\’s idea (a good idea by the way), will be the capital necessary to fund such a venture by a pet owners\’ association.
In order for it to be actuarially credible, a substantial amount of money may be required, especially for legal defence costs.
Nikki, these are dogs not people.
LLCJ yes these are dogs not people however it is my RIGHT to own one of them. I would be the one descriminated against saying you wont insure me is the point I am making.
Nikki –
It is your RIGHT to own any dog you want. It is the insurance company\’s RIGHT not to insure you.
Not all discrimination is a bad thing…
LS
REad E&O Joe\’s post about acceptable discrimination. Especially the point about porsches.
Yes you have a right to own a dog. But you don\’t have the right to insurance. Your insurance company has the right to refuse you insurance because of your choices.
Are life insurers discriminating against smokers and charging them substantially higher rates? Are porsche owners discriminated against for driving fast cars? Are Florida residents discriminated against for living in hurricane prone areas?
Insurance is about risk. Dogs are risky. Therefore an insurance company has a right to minimize it\’s risk.
Obviously, you feel strongly about this issue. however, emotion cannot rule the day. Rules based on objective evidence and logic should govern the way a business does business.
Some carriers in NY are excluding certain breeds in their personal liability policy language just like some carriers exclude trampolines in their policy language.
I don\’t know if they have been tested in court yet.
I just rec\’d my Safeco auto renewal today. There are 4 cars on the policy…one of which is my 2005 Corvette (C6). My wife\’s 2000 BMW 7 series costs 8% more to insure than the Vette and the Vette has $500 Collision ded, as the LP will not accept the $1000 I carry on all the others. We both have identically clean records, same annual mileage, etc. (No tricks here, either… everything is as stated.) IMHO all sports cars are not created or rated equally, just as all dogs are not, or should be. (The C6 will run away from a 911, but is generally even with a 911S, too.)
FWIW