(This story has been updated with comments from an insurance industry trade group.)
Losing a spouse is never easy, either emotionally or financially, and a new study finds that many major auto insurance companies are adding to the grief by raising rates for new widows by as much as 226%.
In general, auto insurers levy penalties, in the form of higher premiums, on those who aren’t married, according to new research by the Consumer Federation of America. The higher rates are not backed up by data showing increased risk, the consumer group claimed.
“It seems inhumane for insurers to raise rates on women who have become widows,” declared CFA Executive Director Stephen Brobeck.
But former Texas State Insurance Commission Robert Hunter, now the CFA’s Director of Insurance, said many of the insurance industry’s practices when it comes to pricing, are invalid and likely “violate actuarial standards.” In recent months, the organization has also attacked the way insurers have been putting more and more emphasis on socioeconomic data, such as a motorist’s credit score, and less on traditional factors like tickets and accidents.
The latest study focused specifically on how insurance companies adjust rates according to a customer’s marital status. It looked at six major insurance firms: State Farm, GEICO, Farmers, Progressive, Nationwide and Liberty. The study then compared rates for two women, one aged 30, another 50, with otherwise perfect driving records, in 10 major cities.
All but State Farm penalized a new widow an average 20%. GEICO, meanwhile, added a premium of as much as 226%, in part depending upon which of the cities a woman lived in.
More broadly, the study concluded that for most companies, and in all of the cities but Tampa, rates automatically were higher for a women who was single, separated, divorced or widowed, though there was “a great deal of variation” by insurer and location, noted Brobeck.
(Chrysler will buyback, then resell, vehicles under consent order. For more, Click Here.)
Farmers, for example, will charge a single, separated or divorced women as much as 34% more than a married women with all other factors being equal.
“It’s hard for us to imagine why becoming a widow makes you a worse driver,” said Hunter, adding that the CFA found it difficult to make any direct correlation between driving risk and marital status. The same was the case with most of the other socioeconomic factors the consumer group has looked at as part of an ongoing study of insurance industry pricing.
(Click Here for details about hot auto sales carrying over from June into July.)
In previous reports, the CFA revealed that lower income motorists and those with lower-than-average credit scores were routinely charged significantly higher premiums than wealthier motorists and those with higher credit ratings. Meanwhile, CFA also found that insurers seldom adjust rates for those who clocked lower mileage each year even though there is a correlation with fewer accidents.
According to Hunter, a trained actuarial, the insurance industry has been moving away from the traditional approach of basing premiums on known risk factors, such as the number of tickets a motorist has, and whether they have been involved in accidents. There is more and more use of what he described as “spurious” data for which it can be difficult to show a real cause-and-effect.
(To see more about how automakers are struggling to keep hackers out of cars, Click Here.)
During a telephone news conference, the two CFA officials suggested that companies may be favoring wealthier married couples simply because such customers are more likely to insure multiple vehicles – as well as their homes.
GEICO, which came in for some of the harshest criticism by the CFA, did not return repeated calls for comment.
James Lynch, an actuary with the trade group the Insurance Information Institute, defended the companies singled out by the CFA, insisting that, “Over the years, they have found married people are less likely to be in an accident.”
If anything “Insurance rates today are fairer than they’ve ever been,” Lynch added, suggesting that motorists have plenty of places to shop around if they “if they feel they’re overcharged or under-served by their insurance company.”
“CFA also found that insurers seldom adjust rates for those who clocked lower mileage each year even though there is a correlation with fewer accidents.”
So…charge more to widows with no real reason other than “correlation” (maybe), but lowering rates based on actual miles driven? Why that’s just poppycock!
What a shocking revelation…or NOT! How many people do not know that insurance companies discriminate against unmarried as well as young people? DUH. How many people actually know that insurance companies do not insure most people based on a good driving record but instead on geographic location? While there is some relationships between all factors, none of them justify the insane rates that many people are charged. Michigan is a perfect example of consumers as a group being swindled. The insurance companies claim it’s due to unlimited payments for catastrophic accidents, but that is nonsense when you look at the statistics.
And if you check state insurance boards or state public service commission staff guess what you’ll find? Many of these people are retired or former insurance or utility employees. Which way do you think they tend to rule when a consumer complaint is filed? Been there, done that.
Insurance companies spend millions on Capitol Hill influencing elected officials who can be bought. Otherwise the insurance company CEOs would be in prison for fraud and discrimination.