Insurance extra fee for having a Hotmail account

[GeoffL]

FWIW, I've found insurers to be opaque and seem to base premium prices on factors that beggar belief and at times they seem random. Using the same provider, I've repeated a search using exactly the same information to get different prices the second time round. Prices from some insurers rise; others fall. There just doesn't seem be any rhyme or reason. So I'm not surprised that choice of domain makes a difference.

 

[jagmanx]

Maybe you deserved it !

The rudest and nastiest reply I have received on this site was from deliciagirl

Such statements are unacceptable !

I have found several of your posts/repeated posts unhelpful / unpleasant / unneccesarry
Are you trying to "wind people up"

 

[antiquesam]

Oh dear.

 

[Deleted member 58274]

January 23 2018, 12:00pm,

Admiral charges Hotmail users more for car insurance | News | The Times & The Sunday Times

Admiral charges Hotmail users more for car insurance

One of Britain’s biggest car insurers has admitted increasing premiums for drivers who apply using a Hotmail account.

Motorists seeking cover from Admiral could be charged £31 extra if they use certain email addresses. The insurer said some domain names were “associated with more accidents” than others, raising applicants’ risk profile.


Does that settle it ?

Trawling (aka RESEARCH) pays off
On the other hand, TROLLING rarely does


jus sayin


james

Actually James I was not referring to any of your posts...your comments seem valid...my admittedly sweeping generalizations were actually aimed at those (on this and other threads) who only jump in negatively and seem to hijack the thread from the OP's point. As in the original point being Hotmail account holders being charged more by Admiral, not wether Hotmail is good or bad....which a subsequent poster also identified. No offence intended to anyone other than those that I (and others) feel merely enter threads to slag people/their opinions in a negative (and to some of us) unpleasant way. That's trolling to me..hence my post you don't like too much LOL. Spose it's all down to interpretation...me just want the site to be the "pleasant place" that Phil(admin) talks of. Constructive criticism...yes. Downright unpleasantness no.. Maja

 

[wildebus]

Actually James I was not referring to any of your posts...your comments seem valid...my admittedly sweeping generalizations were actually aimed at those (on this and other threads) who only jump in negatively and seem to hijack the thread from the OP's point. As in the original point being Hotmail account holders being charged more by Admiral, not wether Hotmail is good or bad....which a subsequent poster also identified. No offence intended to anyone other than those that I (and others) feel merely enter threads to slag people/their opinions in a negative (and to some of us) unpleasant way. That's trolling to me..hence my post you don't like too much LOL. Spose it's all down to interpretation...me just want the site to be the "pleasant place" that Phil(admin) talks of. Constructive criticism...yes. Downright unpleasantness no.. Maja

Could it be that the topics divergence into a discussion about the virtues or otherwise of Hotmail was to provide a possible explanation of why Admiral appeared to charge Hotmail users more than others? Without that, any replies would have to have been confined to pretty much a "yes they do" or "no they don't" type response.

A large number of posts of forums - and this forum is no exception - go off-topic massively, sometimes for worse and sometimes for better (and often much better). However I don't think the general discussion of Hotmail here was actually the slightest bit off the point for the reasons in the previous paragraph.

 

[Channa]

Could it be that the topics divergence into a discussion about the virtues or otherwise of Hotmail was to provide a possible explanation of why Admiral appeared to charge Hotmail users more than others? Without that, any replies would have to have been confined to pretty much a "yes they do" or "no they don't" type response.

A large number of posts of forums - and this forum is no exception - go off-topic massively, sometimes for worse and sometimes for better (and often much better). However I don't think the general discussion of Hotmail here was actually the slightest bit off the point for the reasons in the previous paragraph.

That wasn't the question asked! and the first reply was the merits of Hotmail and its vulnerabilities. Most answers then followed the same vein.

There are two conclusions

1) People with Hotmail accounts ( including myself) are being prejudiced,,,that begs the question who else is doing this

2) Hotmail it appears has weaknesses from a techy point of view from which I wasn't aware for one.

On my part I asked the original question was answered and feel justified in asking! so has it has clearly come to light Hotmail accounts are prejudiced financially ( importantly) and by attitude ( re your own experience)

Many threads do take a different course and I am as guilty as anyone for going off topic ...but on this occasion I felt it important the question was answered.

Channa

 

[Deleted member 62288]

on topic

I think the original question about Admiral's targeted discrimination (after all, that IS what it is) has been answered.
Admiral DO charge their customers who use Hotmail to apply for insurance, up to £31 extra, just for the customer being a hotmail user.

Several other folks asked what was wrong with hotmail, I offer my opinion as to why.

Perception:
hotmail gmail, yahoo and other free email services have been long considered as "disposable" email accounts, free for anyone on the planet to use in an anonymous manner. Anyone can be anyone they wish to be.
There is little or no credibility given to the individuals or company’s that use these services.
These services are the most misused and abused.

They have also been hacked en-mass with user names/passwords etc published on the internet, or what seems more common, those stolen credentials have been sold on for criminal purposes.

These type of anonymous services simply have little to zero trust associated with them, the sender of an email from these services could be anyone anywhere.
These are mostly where the spam comes from, the scams and other malicious activity is mostly from these type of platforms

They are insecure and totally unsuited for any serious use such as payments, banking, or for anything personal, confidential or sensitive.
They are considered high risk from a trust point of view.

Sure they work and they are ok for sending trivia over the internet if the sender attaches no importance to the contents, no problem for the holiday snaps and chit chat. But for anything else they are to be avoided.

I pointed out that there were and are, other email service providers that offer free AND secure email services that will improve all areas of privacy & security for the sender and enhance the credibility of the sender.

I also added some comments about VPNs, which I consider to be an absolute essential for a traveller who uses the internet from random places. In fact, for me these issues around privacy and data security are very high priorities for me whether I am travelling or not.

Probably a topic that needs it's own thread (unless one exists already)

That of secure email and internet access while travelling.

james

 

[wildebus]

That wasn't the question asked! and the first reply was the merits of Hotmail and its vulnerabilities. Most answers then followed the same vein.

There are two conclusions

1) People with Hotmail accounts ( including myself) are being prejudiced,,,that begs the question who else is doing this

2) Hotmail it appears has weaknesses from a techy point of view from which I wasn't aware for one.

On my part I asked the original question was answered and feel justified in asking! so has it has clearly come to light Hotmail accounts are prejudiced financially ( importantly) and by attitude ( re your own experience)

Many threads do take a different course and I am as guilty as anyone for going off topic ...but on this occasion I felt it important the question was answered.

Channa

If you want to take things literally, the initial post was not a question at all but more of a statement. The first question that was asked was by you, and AFTER a comment was made about why (in that posters opinion) Hotmail is a poor mail service.
And regarding the first question - I.e. YOUR'S - it included "Shed any light or proof an e mail address can influence premium", you got replies answering this (including my own). So "the question" WAS answered I think was it not?

 

[Channa]

If you want to take things literally, the initial post was not a question at all but more of a statement. The first question that was asked was by you, and AFTER a comment was made about why (in that posters opinion) Hotmail is a poor mail service.
And regarding the first question - I.e. YOUR'S - it included "Shed any light or proof an e mail address can influence premium", you got replies answering this (including my own). So "the question" WAS answered I think was it not?

The initial statement clearly inferred an additional premium was charged by being user of a Hotmail account , that was the spirit and intention of the point ,,,not you or your new found loves appraisal of Hotmail ****

the next post was
Hotmail is a poor choice of email, but I thought it was a while since it was regarded as a sign of being a scammer. However, nobody is forced to use Hotmail. Your call!

In the posters opinion maybe , supported by yourself ,,,but easy to bloody see without your pedantics neither of your comments answered the question

SO know we have established e mail addresses are influencing online buying ( and my wallet) forgive me if I am more interested in this than you and hairy dog wowoing us with your technical prowess of e mails.

Channa

Channa

 

[wildebus]

Keep your shirt on, son

 

[Deleted member 62288]

Cushty

I do like a lively debate

james

 

[Channa]

I do like a lively debate

james

SO now we have established e mail addresses are another way of screwing us, I do appreciate Hairydog and Wildebus pointing to the frailties of Hotmail as a e mail provider stuff I didn't know

BTW cest moi lively ? never

Channa

 

[Deleted member 58274]

Manner

Could it be that the topics divergence into a discussion about the virtues or otherwise of Hotmail was to provide a possible explanation of why Admiral appeared to charge Hotmail users more than others? Without that, any replies would have to have been confined to pretty much a "yes they do" or "no they don't" type response.

A large number of posts of forums - and this forum is no exception - go off-topic massively, sometimes for worse and sometimes for better (and often much better). However I don't think the general discussion of Hotmail here was actually the slightest bit off the point for the reasons in the previous paragraph.

...the "divergence" is acceptable, and indeed welcome ...if done in an appropriate manner ...which unfortunately, is not always the case and what I have been trying to address. A lively debate indeed, though probably exhausted now ? It is for me...I'm off to the LPG refilling thread !!! Maja

 

[wildebus]

...the "divergence" is acceptable, and indeed welcome ...if done in an appropriate manner ...which unfortunately, is not always the case and what I have been trying to address. A lively debate indeed, though probably exhausted now ? It is for me...I'm off to the LPG refilling thread !!! Maja

You are quite right. And on THIS thread (and IMO and others opinons may differ, which is their right AS WELL) it was appropriate. Many other threads, things have gone off on a tangent and never returned, and also never made sense as well as creating animosity which is not needed and not welcome (the "what size cables" thread is a key example and one which I read, had an opinion on, but didn't voice it at all as it would have made no difference).

Anyways, my last and final point on THIS discussion is this:
Hotmail is pants. Yahoo mail is just as bad. Use a mail address within your own domain and then you can route it and use it on whatever service you like and if you you change provider you can still keep your same address.
Plus ... for stuff like comparision sites, you can create a special address within your domain for that, and when your comparision is done, just block it and you will never get troubled with spam to that address again. Simple solution to what is unfortunately a regular problem.

 

[Channa]

...the "divergence" is acceptable, and indeed welcome ...if done in an appropriate manner ...which unfortunately, is not always the case and what I have been trying to address. A lively debate indeed, though probably exhausted now ? It is for me...I'm off to the LPG refilling thread !!! Maja

Who the feck are you a self appointed moderator ? did anyone ask you to address ?

Channa

 

[GeoffL]

[...]
Plus ... for stuff like comparision sites, you can create a special address within your domain for that, and when your comparision is done, just block it and you will never get troubled with spam to that address again. Simple solution to what is unfortunately a regular problem.

FWIW, I give each company that 'needs' my email address and individual address within my own domain. (e.g. Confused@mydomain.com for the Confused.com comparison site). That way I know which company was responsible for any spam an address attracts and I can block that address without affecting legitimate messages from 'well-behaved' companies. One way of doing this is to create a 'catch all' account which you then filter in your mail client. HTH