Alberta man changes gender to save money in car insurance

[Slava]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

If drivers had different accident rates by race, would it be okay to charge different premiums based on those rates?

There are other examples of potential ratings reasons or exclusions where the insurers cannot use them though. For example, a well known insurer was not accepting risks due to postal codes years ago, and that practice was shut down (it was the postal code for a reserve).

The truth is that this isn't some wildly contrived idea though; young males have demonstrated more likelihood and severity for claims, so why shouldn't the insurer require a higher premium? Men have slightly shorter life expectancy than women, so why shouldn't we pay higher premiums? At some point it has nothing to do with discrimination and more to do with statistical evidence, right?

So to me the argument is about how insurers should be allowed to quantify that risk. We've decided (as a society) that race isn't acceptable, and at least until now in Alberta, allowed them to use gender. Some places don't and the world hasn't fallen apart there.

And I guess the other question, much more generally speaking, is when does a transgender person take on all of the attributes of the sex they identify with? Is it when they make that decision, when the doctor signs, or maybe never? I haven't got a clue what the answer is.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

If drivers had different accident rates by race, would it be okay to charge different premiums based on those rates?

Race is much harder to define and classify than gender.

[EldrickOnIce]

This is a great story

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Slava

There are other examples of potential ratings reasons or exclusions where the insurers cannot use them though. For example, a well known insurer was not accepting risks due to postal codes years ago, and that practice was shut down (it was the postal code for a reserve).

The truth is that this isn't some wildly contrived idea though; young males have demonstrated more likelihood and severity for claims, so why shouldn't the insurer require a higher premium? Men have slightly shorter life expectancy than women, so why shouldn't we pay higher premiums? At some point it has nothing to do with discrimination and more to do with statistical evidence, right?

So to me the argument is about how insurers should be allowed to quantify that risk. We've decided (as a society) that race isn't acceptable, and at least until now in Alberta, allowed them to use gender. Some places don't and the world hasn't fallen apart there.

And I guess the other question, much more generally speaking, is when does a transgender person take on all of the attributes of the sex they identify with? Is it when they make that decision, when the doctor signs, or maybe never? I haven't got a clue what the answer is.

Postal code still has an effect on your insurance though.

[Flamenspiel]

Sounds like these gender definitions need to be further defined

[Deelow]

The best thing about this story is that I learned about it on the front page of Red Flag Deals.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Flamenspiel

Sounds like these gender definitions need to be further defined

What is this, Nazi Germany?

You cant just define 'Gender!'

People like you are whats wrong with this world, show some empathy.

EDIT: I forgot this is the internet..../heavysarcasm.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

If drivers had different accident rates by race, would it be okay to charge different premiums based on those rates?

Well, first of all, of course they do. If you compare any random population samples they're obviously going to have different rates of accidents - you could just as well compare fans of Westworld to fans of Walking Dead and you'd get different accident rates.

It's more a question of whether there's some reason to correlate the categories of driver to the accident rates seen in each case. In the case of men and women, well, testosterone has to account for some of it. In the case of different races, what's the reason for any difference you might find in overally accident rates between, say, black people and arabic people? I doubt there is any direct reason.

[Flamenspiel]

Originally Posted by Locke

What is this, Nazi Germany?

You cant just define 'Gender!'

People like you are whats wrong with this world, show some empathy.

EDIT: I forgot this is the internet..../heavysarcasm.

lol, i meant from a contractual perspective its really a technical issue for insurers. I don't care about the JP debate.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Well, first of all, of course they do. If you compare any random population samples they're obviously going to have different rates of accidents - you could just as well compare fans of Westworld to fans of Walking Dead and you'd get different accident rates.

It's more a question of whether there's some reason to correlate the categories of driver to the accident rates seen in each case. In the case of men and women, well, testosterone has to account for some of it. In the case of different races, what's the reason for any difference you might find in overally accident rates between, say, black people and arabic people? I doubt there is any direct reason.

Of course there would be, because the Arabic drivers would be male.

Seriously though, if the Westworld vs Walking Dead have stastically significantly different accident rates, then in might be valid to use that for prediction. We wouldn't know why their rates would be different, but we'd have learnt that they (probably) are. We don't need to know what's in the black box.

[calgarygringo]

In the biz and have seen where brokers have put female on males apps just to give a better deal. Many never look at what has been entered and a shady or well versed broker knows the places to save money and get more discounts. Answering the questions certain ways is why you hear stories of people getting 2 totally different quotes coming out of the same insurance company.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I Think that the Doctor should be in some trouble though, I doubt he did a proper evaluation and just scribbled a note that allowed a person to game the system.

I don't blame the doctor. The last thing I would want is to be drug into some national debate because I doubted the gender of a patient.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by SebC

Seriously though, if the Westworld vs Walking Dead have stastically significantly different accident rates, then in might be valid to use that for prediction. We wouldn't know why their rates would be different, but we'd have learnt that they (probably) are. We don't need to know what's in the black box.

Unless it's just randomness. As I said, you can take literally any two groups of people, based on any metric you want - hair colour, height, ethnicity, whether they have green or blue eyes, whether their great-grandfather fought in a war... literally any categories you want to come up with will have different accident rates. You don't just pick a handful of the infinite factors for which that's true and base your actuarial calculations on them, you need some sort of basis for suggesting that there's causation there.

[Coys1882]

I'm looking forward to hearing he's won some female scholarships and a membership to Spa-lady.

[Northendzone]

This guy is a real bag who has already had a couple of accidents.

I personally hope that he gets in an accident and gets screwed over.

Also, his doctor is a real piece of work for signing this document.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

It's more a question of whether there's some reason to correlate the categories of driver to the accident rates seen in each case. In the case of men and women, well, testosterone has to account for some of it.

DING DING DING. Which is why I find it hilarious that the guy changed his gender on his ID and was magically given a lower rate. Nothing changed but his documentation.

It makes no sense, whether someone is truly transgender or not. There's no obligation for a transgender person to undergo any sort of hormonal therapy or surgery to transition, they can choose to live as they are but outwardly portray the other gender. Biologically, nothing has changed, and thus their risk from an insurance perspective should remain the same. The hormones in our bodies that influence behavior are about biological sex, not gender.

This is an edge case, so I highly doubt there is going to be a rolling back of government policies that allow trans people to change their gender, but it does force us to ask some very important questions about how the insurance industry operates, and if they should be permitted to include something like gender as a factor going forward. It has been banned elsewhere.

Originally Posted by Northendzone

This guy is a real bag who has already had a couple of accidents.

I personally hope that he gets in an accident and gets screwed over.

Also, his doctor is a real piece of work for signing this document.

Serious question: why? I mean, aside from the usual outrage we're all tired of, real talk, why is this guy so awful in your opinion (and his doctor for that matter)? What is he doing that is so abhorrent that you hope he gets in an accident and has a negative outcome from that?

[Winsor_Pilates]

I thought this happens every time a man buys a Chevy Cruze

[Northendzone]

First off, perhaps if this guy was not a crappy driver, then he would not need to pull this stunt.

Secondly, to me this is insurance fraud. Next thing you know this guy, no, woman, will be on the news crying the blues because he lost his coverage, or a claim was being declined by a large insurance company looking to screw him. Yeah, those pesky riders and that contract language is there to bend you over.

Lastly, to me this really takes away from those that are dealing with real gender issues. He is making a choice of convienence, and his doctor is making it easy for him.

Does he also apply for life insurance as a female because that is cheaper. Oh no wait, disability coverage for a female is more, guess I have outdoor plumbing again.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

First off, perhaps if this guy was not a crappy driver, then he would not need to pull this stunt.

Irrelevant.

Originally Posted by Northendzone

Secondly, to me this is insurance fraud. Next thing you know this guy, no, woman, will be on the news crying the blues because he lost his coverage, or a claim was being declined by a large insurance company looking to screw him. Yeah, those pesky riders and that contract language is there to bend you over.

And who is going to make the determination whether or not someone is the gender they suggest they are? Again, trans people are under no obligation to transition beyond simply adopting their chosen gender. So how do you claim he's a fraud? What is the litmus test? Who determines the legitimacy of someone identifying as a different gender? Pretty obvious it isn't any of us.

Originally Posted by Northendzone

Lastly, to me this really takes away from those that are dealing with real gender issues. He is making a choice of convienence, and his doctor is making it easy for him.

Not unless you're intentionally looking to be outraged. This is about insurance. Why would insurance be based on something that can be changed, such as gender? Our biology is why men are rated higher, because testosterone and estrogen influence people's behavior, and whether you "identify" as male, female, non-binary, or Thomas the Tank Engine doesn't change what hormones are flowing; your physiology doesn't just change because you choose to identify differently.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Irrelevant.

And who is going to make the determination whether or not someone is the gender they suggest they are? Again, trans people are under no obligation to transition beyond simply adopting their chosen gender. So how do you claim he's a fraud? What is the litmus test? Who determines the legitimacy of someone identifying as a different gender? Pretty obvious it isn't any of us.

Not unless you're intentionally looking to be outraged. This is about insurance. Why would insurance be based on something that can be changed, such as gender? Our biology is why men are rated higher, because testosterone and estrogen influence people's behavior, and whether you "identify" as male, female, non-binary, or Thomas the Tank Engine doesn't change what hormones are flowing; your physiology doesn't just change because you choose to identify differently.

The individual will make the determination what gender they are. It’s pretty simple. The Alberta Governemnt has removed any requirement for Doctors to sign off. All you need to do is sign an affidavit saying you identify with whatever gender

He is committing fraud because he signed an affidavit when changing his genders with the government and then in a newspaper article says he does not identify as a women.

You are right that this is about insurance the title of the article should read Man commits fraud to get cheaper insurance. It’s a non story.

As for the insurance risk the pool of transgendered people likely isn’t large enough to change the risk profile of the male group and the female groups so the premiums including trans people would not significantly change so it’s a non-issue from an actuarial perspective.