Insurance companies hit bereaved singles with hefty price hikes. Kay Lawley received renewal quotes from her insurance provider, Ageas, shortly after her husband's death. The quotes had increased by up to 15%, with her home and contents policy rising by almost 12% – from £1,039 to £1,161.
Lawley was stunned that the quotes had gone up despite her being the sole remaining policyholder on both policies. "I asked why," she says, "and Ageas just told me 'that's what comes up on the screen'. I was already the lead name on both policies and nothing else has changed. How can such decisions come at a time when the surviving partner is in no fit state to argue the toss, and also when a household's income is likely to be reduced?"
Analysts say that many insurers view single policyholders as higher risk, which can result in increased premiums. Divorced and separated couples are also affected by this "bereavement penalty". The policy is based on algorithms that match individuals to the claims history of customers with similar profiles.
Ageas argues that joint policyholders are statistically less risky than solo ones and therefore receive a discount, which is forfeited when one of them dies. However, Lawley will lose the discount when her policies are next renewed. Ageas has now refunded the additional premiums it had charged and sent her a bouquet of flowers.
Fairer Finance says that insurers' opaque pricing practices are undermining public trust, and that the increasing reliance on artificial intelligence to calculate premiums is making things worse. The campaign group wants government and regulators to insist on more transparency.
A family who lost their husband found themselves paying £440 more in insurance premiums after his death. They had been quoted a renewal price of just over £200 before he passed away, but Swinton Insurance increased the cost to £641. When they complained, the company blamed its system for the increase and said it could do nothing about it.
The Association of British Insurers declined to answer why drivers with no claims are considered riskier once they live alone, or how widespread the bereavement premium is. Ageas has apologized for the distress caused and will offer compensation. Swinton has also said it will review its process after the incident.
Lawley was stunned that the quotes had gone up despite her being the sole remaining policyholder on both policies. "I asked why," she says, "and Ageas just told me 'that's what comes up on the screen'. I was already the lead name on both policies and nothing else has changed. How can such decisions come at a time when the surviving partner is in no fit state to argue the toss, and also when a household's income is likely to be reduced?"
Analysts say that many insurers view single policyholders as higher risk, which can result in increased premiums. Divorced and separated couples are also affected by this "bereavement penalty". The policy is based on algorithms that match individuals to the claims history of customers with similar profiles.
Ageas argues that joint policyholders are statistically less risky than solo ones and therefore receive a discount, which is forfeited when one of them dies. However, Lawley will lose the discount when her policies are next renewed. Ageas has now refunded the additional premiums it had charged and sent her a bouquet of flowers.
Fairer Finance says that insurers' opaque pricing practices are undermining public trust, and that the increasing reliance on artificial intelligence to calculate premiums is making things worse. The campaign group wants government and regulators to insist on more transparency.
A family who lost their husband found themselves paying £440 more in insurance premiums after his death. They had been quoted a renewal price of just over £200 before he passed away, but Swinton Insurance increased the cost to £641. When they complained, the company blamed its system for the increase and said it could do nothing about it.
The Association of British Insurers declined to answer why drivers with no claims are considered riskier once they live alone, or how widespread the bereavement premium is. Ageas has apologized for the distress caused and will offer compensation. Swinton has also said it will review its process after the incident.
... Like, can't they see that people like Kay Lawley are just trying to get by and take care of themselves during a super tough time? It's not fair that they're hit with huge price hikes because her husband passed away. I mean, shouldn't their lives be protected, not their wallets? 
And it's so frustrating that these companies are using fancy algorithms to decide who gets a better deal - it's all just so arbitrary! 
I'm all for transparency and fairness in insurance pricing... it's time for the government to step in and make some changes 
️.
Insurance companies need to get their act together when it comes to pricing policies for singles like Kay Lawley. It's not fair that she's being penalized just because her husband passed away. I mean, come on! 
A 15% price hike is a lot of extra money to swallow, especially when you're already going through a tough time. And what's the logic behind this "bereavement penalty" anyway? It seems like these insurers are just using fancy algorithms to make more cash off people who can't even defend themselves. 
I'm kinda surprised that insurers think singles are a higher risk than joint policyholders... like, what's the logic there? If you're not using the other person as a co-signer, how does that necessarily make you more likely to make a claim? 
Does that really make up for the hassle and stress they're causing? 
. And it's not like these insurers are being transparent about their pricing practices, it's all very opaque and unfair 
.
. It's time for the government to step in and make sure that insurance companies are treating customers with respect and fairness 
.
Insurance companies need to rethink their pricing strategy ASAP! I mean, can you imagine getting a huge price hike right when you're already struggling to cope with the loss of your partner? It's just not fair 
. The fact that they're using algorithms to match your profile to other customers' claims history and then applying that to increase premiums is just...meh 
. I'm all for insurers looking out for their members, but this is just plain cruel 
. What really gets me is that they're not even being transparent about it 
. The government and regulators need to step in here and make some changes. Insurance companies should be working with customers, not against them 
. It's not fair that they're increasing premiums by 15% or more, especially when there's no reason why Kay Lawley should have seen an increase like that. The fact that she was the sole remaining policyholder on both policies yet still got hit with a hike is just ridiculous 
this is so unfair 
what's the point of even having an insurance policy if it's just gonna be a financial burden? 
I think this is so unfair, especially when you're already dealing with grief and loss. Insurance companies should be helping people during tough times, not taking advantage of their vulnerability 
It's not like Kay Lawley did anything wrong by being a single parent and having two policies to pay for. And what's up with the algorithms that are supposed to match people's claims history but keep sending up prices anyway? 
, yeah right! I'm sure it was just a PR stunt to make them look better. But seriously, what about all the other people who have been slapped with huge price hikes? That's not fair at all 
. The government and regulators need to step in and make some changes before this gets out of hand. More transparency is needed, like, yesterday! 
. It's like they're making them pay more for being single 
. And don't even get me started on the "algorithms" thing 
.
.