The European Commission has a poor record on claims, so it shouldn't interfere in how we insure drivers, says John Jackson
As an underwriter, would you cover a company whose books had not been passed by the auditors for nine years and whose entire "board" had once been sacked over failure to tackle fraud and corruption?
And would you accept the diktat of such a company if it tried to tell the insurance industry how to run its business, while failing abysmally over its own claims?
No? Well, the "company" is the European Commission, and the issue is women drivers.
The House of Lords EU social and consumer affairs sub-committee is furious at this latest Brussels Directive which claims that insurers discriminate between men and women drivers, favouring the latter through lower premiums. And on Monday a ministerial meeting in Brussels was looking at what to do with this latest order.
Evidence to the House of Lords committee claimed that an average 17-year-old paid £3,944 for motor insurance if male, but only £2,488 if female - thus there was "discrimination".
The ABI has criticised the European Commission as being "naïve" over the issue, warning that insurance would move to the higher of the two current prices, so making motor insurance much more expensive for women. The ABI has called for "impact analysis" on the proposal.
This should be just the ticket for one of the new EU commissioners, who has already become a hate figure among the Brussels old guard. Step forward the new employment commissioner, Czech Vladimir Spidla, who plans to do just that - subject every proposal he receives to an "impact assessment" on businesses.
As the ABI points out, existing UK sex discrimination laws allow gender to be used as a factor in insurance when the data is relevant, reliable and objective.
It is worth examining the dismal record of the European Commission in the field of claims.
The European Court of Auditors has just issued a scathing report that £1.8bn in inflated claims paid through the notorious Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has never been repaid.
The auditors went on to say that 17% of all inflated farm payments under the CAP discovered by auditors since 1971 have never been repaid. In Brussels-speak this appalling situation is described by the auditors as "irregular payments" as it can only be termed "fraud" when each case is proven in court.
What is of concern is that the UK government is understood to broadly support the Directive.
But the good news from Brussels to cheer the UK insurance industry is that several of these new commissioners - mainly from the new member states of Eastern Europe - are about to breath reality into the Brussels cobwebs.
Let us hope interference in the UK insurance industry comes urgently into their sights.
