OK, not actually Earth shattering news .
Nothing new here . . . this was already a well-known fact before Troll posted that article
Well, yes, that seems right. It wouldn’t be fair to charge everyone the same rates, would it? Some areas are probably higher risk areas than others, so it seems logical that rates would be higjer there.
Someone living in downtown Manhattan would and should pay more than someone living in the boonies in upstate NY. Much higher chance of accident, plus repairs cost a lot more.
In other news, did you know that people in coach are paying less than people in first class!?
I didn’t know.
You could evaluate people based on their performance. I’ll bet people of different color and religion have different risks too.
That’s not adjacent.
Passengers get to choose their class.
True, but that’s not as easily quantifiable as location. If your car is garaged and driven in a high traffic area with a higher than average number of collisions, it’s fair to conclude that your chances of having a collision will be higher. And so will your rates.
And they get to choose what car they drive and where they live.
Yes of course. That’s why rates are high in NYC and Chicago, but low in Fargo, ND.
Just wait until R. Troll finds out that these also effect rates : Type of vehicle - age - driving record - credit rating - commuting distance - whether home or apartment - past claims.
Throw in home insurance, even property tax rates even mortgage interest rates, Like others have said SOP, not that I can change it.
Speaking of adjacent, to use your own terminology . . .
In my neck of the woods, some affluent areas literally ARE adjacent to poor areas, which are also infested by crime, gangs, drugs, etc.
Not surprisingly, the folks in the poorer areas tend to pay more
That’s the opposite of my experience. I remember in my early 20’s as a college kid trying to save some money on rent I moved to a decidedly “worse” part of town. My car insurance went up. I figured it was due to a higher crime rate, more congested streets, more uninsured motorists, etc.
Just one more reason it sucks to be poor.
Yeah, I mispoke, I meant “poorer” . . . not “less poorer”
there, I’ve corrected it
Insurance does that, all the time. Wreck 3 cars and see how high your insurance goes. When you walk into a new insurer’s office, they check those old records.
Maybe, but it is illegal to use that information, if indeed the company has it, to charge differently. State insurance commissioners are supposed to enforce things like that. If they don’t the courts will.
My assumption is the rates are based on crime statistics.
Same on Long Island. For example, Garden City right next to Hempstead.
They aren’t discriminating on the basis of where you drive but where you live.
When they choose a seat on a plane they know what they’re buying; when they choose a place to live they don’t know that they’re also setting the price of their auto insurance.
Fargoans drive in Fargo; NYCers drive in NYC.
There’s even a law in California that mandates discounts for college graduates with certain degrees, from which I benefited. The credit rating thing is purely discriminatory: a way to prey on people who have no choice - owning v. renting too. All of this can be ignored and adjusted-for on the basis of experience.
When I was in the auto club they rebated premiums to insurees who didn’t make claims. That’s the way to do it for everybody: charge everyone at the same rate, rebate to safe drivers.
Which keeps even the safe drivers poorer.
I remember I couldn’t afford a car.
Yes, I’m for that, why we don’t need to discriminate on the basis of zip, home-owning, credit rating, other factors that keep people already down down despite their good behavior.
Are they worse drivers?
You need criteria to rate the risk of drivers that haven’t had an accident, moving violations, comprehensive event (trees falling on the car, vandalism), or stolen car. Zip codes are great to determine the likelihood of stolen or damaged vehicles. Everyone, regardless of driving history is exposed to that.
Credit rating has proven to be a very good indicator of risk for drivers without any tickets or accidents. Bad FICO score means higher risk. People who pay their bills on time are less likely to have accidents. Home owners statistically are lower risk.
The alternative is for even good drivers in low risk situations to pay more to compensate for the reckless drivers parking in high theft or riot-prone areas.
My uncle lives in Brooklyn but keeps his car at a friend’s place in New Jersey. I think he is in a distinct, very small minority. For the vast majority of people, where they live is where they drive their car. How else do they get home and leave again?
Well that’s just dumb. I learned my lesson early on. Even at that age I knew that moving would involve changes in my electric and water bill, garbage service, gasoline purchases, etc. The next couple of times I moved I also checked with Allstate to inquire about car insurance rate changes, until it didn’t matter anymore.
[quote=“RandomTroll, post:18, topic:127160”]
I remember I couldn’t afford a car.
Cars were cheap back then, especially for someone with mechanical skills. I remember buying a car for $750 and driving it for a couple of years with very little money for repairs.