The Impact on Women on the Removal of Gender as a Rating Variable in Motor-Vehicle Insurance

  • Anthea Natalie Wagener University of South Africa
Keywords: Insurance risk assessment, insurance, rating, rating variables, motor-vehicle insurance, gender rating, impact on women, discrimination, unfair discrimination, Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000, American case law,

Abstract

Insurers use actuarial statistics as rating variables to differentiate and distinguish for the purposes of risk classification. They justify their use of actuarial statistics due to its accuracy as a predictor of risk. South African motor-vehicle insurers use gender, inter alia, as a rating variable to classify risks into certain classes and to determine insurance premiums. Depending upon whether the insured is male or female, it could have a significant impact on the cost of his or her premium.  Women drivers pay less for motor-vehicle insurance because actuarial statistics indicate that women are more careful drivers and are involved in 20 per cent fewer accidents than men.  Men pay higher premiums because the statistics indicate that they are less responsible drivers than women.

 

Should a South African court decide that the use of gender as a motor-vehicle insurance rating variable is unfair discrimination, this would benefit male drivers, as it would lower their premium. Women, on the other hand, would be disadvantaged as they would be required to pay higher premiums to subsidise men. The article examines the impact that the removal of gender as a rating variable in motor-vehicle insurance would have on women, and asks if the effects thereof would influence a South African Court’s decision in determining if the use of gender as a rating variable amounts to unfair discrimination. 

 

The article first considers the findings of American and Canadian Courts in determining this same issue and then considers South African equality legislation, particularly the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000 (“the Equality Act”). Thereafter, the article provides recommendations for a South African Court.

 

As the Equality Act indicates that the discriminatory insurance practice of placing a disadvantage or advantage on persons based inter alia on their gender may possibly be unfair, it is suggested that South African insurers would have to consider alternative methods of risk assessment. In the light of the American and the Canadian case law, the article suggests that there should be a change of approach to insurance risk assessment. Rather than using gender as a rating variable the insurer could assess the risk of the individual insured, using appropriate, neutral rating variables suited to the particular circumstances of the insured. This would require a much more intensive and individualised risk evaluation and would require the insurer to “tailor-make” insurance for each individual. It is submitted that such an approach would give effect to the right to equality by disallowing the use of gender as a rating variable without producing the undesirable consequence that women drivers would have to subsidise men.

   

References

Bibliography

Albertyn, Goldblatt and Roederer Promotion of Equality

Albertyn C, Goldblatt B and Roederer C (eds) Introduction to the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act, Act 4 of 2000 (Witwatersrand University Press Johannesburg 2001)

Braun 2005-2006 Rev Const Stud

Braun E "Adverse Effect Discrimination: Proving the Prima Facie Case" 2005-2006 Rev Const Stud 119-150

Fourie 2011 Cover Magazine

Fourie C "Gender Ruling Unlikely to Affect South African Motorists" 2011 Cover Magazine April 40

Kimball 1979 Am Bar Found Res J

Kimball SL "Reverse Sex Discrimination: Manhart" 1979 Am Bar Found Res J 83-139

Kok 2002 SAJHR

Kok A "Motor Vehicle Insurance, the Constitution and the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act" 2002 SAJHR 59-85

Lemmens and Thiery "Insurance and Human Rights"

Lemmens T and Thiery Y "Insurance and Human Rights: What can Europe Learn from Canadian Anti-discrimination Law?" in Van Schoubroek C and Cousey H (eds) Discriminatie in Verzekering – Discrimination et Assurance (Maklu Antwerpen-Apeldoorn 2007) 253-294

Miller 1984-1985 Duq L Rev

Miller RA "Discrimination by Gender in Automobile Insurance: A Note on Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co v Insurance Commissioner" 1984-1985 Duq L Rev 621-630

Pothier 1999 Constitutional Forum

Pothier D "BCGSEU: Turning a Page in Canadian Human Rights Law" 1999 Constitutional Forum 19-29

Seiner 2006 Yale L & Pol'y Rev

Seiner JA "Disentangling Disparate Impact and Disparate Treatment: Adapting the Canadian Approach" 2006 Yale L & Pol'y Rev 95-142

Sheppard 2001 McGill L J

Sheppard C "Of Forest Fires and Systemic Discrimination: A Review of British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v BCGSEU" 2001 McGill L J 533-569

Vivian 2011 Cover Magazine

Vivian RW "Gender Discrimination and Insurance: Economists versus Lawyers" 2011 Cover Magazine April 36

Register of cases

Arizona Governing Committee for Tax Deferred Annuity and Deferred Compensation Plans v Norris 103 S Ct 3492 (US SC, 1983)

British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v BCGSEU 1999 3 SCR 3; 127 DLR (4th) 1 (SC Can)

British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles) v British Columbia (Council of Human Rights) 1999 3 SCR 868; 1999 181 DLR (4th) 385 (SC Can)

City of Los Angeles, Department of Water and Power v Manhart 98 S Ct 1370 (US SC, 1978)

Co-operators General Insurance Co v Alberta (Human Rights Commission) 1993 107 DLR (4th) 298 (Alta CA)

Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company v Insurance Commissioner of the Commonwealth Pennsylvania 482 A 2d 542 (SC Pa, 1984)

Insurance Services Office v Commissioner of Insurance 381 So 2d 515 (La Ct App, 1979)

Pennsylvania National Organisation for Women v Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Insurance Department 551 A 2d 1162 (Pa Cmwlth, 1988)

State of Florida, Department of Insurance v Insurance Services Office 434 So 2d 908 (Fla App Dist, 1983)

Zurich Insurance Co v Ontario (Human Rights Commission) 1992 93 DLR (4th) 346 (SC Can)

Register of legislation

Casualty and Surety Rate Regulation Act, 1947

Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Human Rights Code, 1981

National Credit Act 34 of 2005

Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000

Register of internet sources

ECJ 2011 http://bit.ly/X5Ot1G

European Court of Justice Case 236/09, Association belge des Consommateurs Test-Achats ASBL, Yann van Vugt, Charles Basselier v Conseil des ministres http://bit.ly/X5Ot1G [date of use 30 Jan 2012]

First for Women Date unknown http://bit.ly/16pBB9l

First for Women Date unknown About First for Women http://bit.ly/16pBB9l [date of use 17 Feb 2012]

First for Women Date unknown http://bit.ly/ZuTqh2

First for Women Date unknown Why We Insure Women http://bit.ly/ZuTqh2 [date of use 17 Feb 2012]

Published
2017-04-26
How to Cite
WagenerA. N. (2017). The Impact on Women on the Removal of Gender as a Rating Variable in Motor-Vehicle Insurance. Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal, 16(1), 482-504. https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2013/v16i1a2319
Section
Notes