How do the insurance companies view single folks?

What i mean is... i just was in my Bible study looking @ 1 Cor. 4 where Paul is talking about being single VS married. i made to comment, i've been told the insurance business willdoes consider a person over ~35, who is single, as having an alternative lifestyle. We were talking about discrimination against people who are single. This subjest isn't in written policy, but can any one support this claim about the insurance perspective on singles in writing?
Additional Details
i can't thank you all enough for your answers. It's an interesting subject. Nice discussion.

This is an interesting question. I have heard many questions about why insurance companies charge what they charge, but I have never heard anyone say that the companies charge more for singles because they have an "alternative lifestyle."

The truth is much more boring. Some companies charge more for singles, for some types of insurance, but it is NOT because of "alternative lifestyles." They just do the math. For each class of business, the actuary calculates how much the company takes in, and how much the company pays out. For auto insurance, for example, most companies try to take in 5-8% more than they pay out in claims and expenses. (This profit margin varies by the type of insurance.) So if a company aims for a 5% profit margin, and it is making only 2% on singles over 35, then the actuary will recommend that the product manager increase the rate for singles over 35. But if the company is making 10% on singles over 35, then the product manager will most likely LOWER the rates, because they can be more competitive and attract more customers. These are formulas calculated in a spreadsheet.

By following these formulas, most homeowners companies don't rate on marital status; but many auto insurance companies do charge more for single drivers because singles are more likely to have auto claims. (By around age 35 and up, it was usually about 5-10% more.) Nobody can be certain why. We ASSUME that this is because they are more likely to live alone, so they are more likely to drive everywhere. On the other hand, a married couple is more likely to share rides for part of their driving needs. But we can't be sure if this explanation is the real cause, or if it is something else. Frankly, it doesn't matter. The pricing decision is based purely on the numbers as described above. It doesn't have anything to do with someone calling one lifestyle an "alternative lifestyle."

Here's the key point: Insurance companies WANT to get new customers. The product managers' and executives' jobs depend on (a) making a profit, and (b) growing. They have absolutely NO INTEREST in raising rates arbitrarily on certain groups because of "alternative lifestyles," because that kind of behavior would prevent them from reaching their growth goals. They only raise rates when they are unprofitable on that segment of business.

As an insurance agent I can tell you that is absolutely absurd!!

In 2008 that's ridiculous....BUT, turn back the clock 30-40 years and I KID YOU NOT that insurance companies used to check with you neighbors to see what kind of person you were. Apparently in one case some of the neighbors mentioned "gentleman callers" that would spend the night at this unwed woman's home. The insurance company denied her coverage due to her moral standard.

I always loved that one...

Jeff

Who told you that garbage? Ask them to back it up.

As far as I know insurance companies do make differences based on age, gender, health condition and some behaviors (ex. dangerous profesions/hobbies, history of DUIs, etc).

However I have no eveidence that they do for other things like sexual preference, marital status, religion, etc.

I've been in insurance/employee benefits for a long time, and I've never heard anything so silly.

Typically insurance companies look at "relevant" things like a person's health, and not silly things like whether or not they're married or single.

I'd ask the person who told you this where on earth he heard something so ludicrous.

So, ask the person who told you that.

I cannot support that claim on the insurance perspective - I've never heard of it before. I think they're making it up.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment:

Archive: Forum -Forum -Finance - Links - 1 - 2 - RSS - All RSS Feeds
The Causes and the Results. 0.004
Copyright (c) 2011 Financial Crisis Sunday, May 27, 2012 - Terms of use - Privacy Policy