This Observatory would have a double vocation

The high authority against discrimination and for equality (Halde) promised to the insurers that it would put on the table a number of recommendations aimed at promoting equality of access to insurance. Interested parties had indeed taken the thing seriously, not leaving hear between segmentation of risk - based pricing, authorized and regulated by the law - and discrimination, the border may be fairly tenuous ("Les Echos" of 10 November).

It is now made. The College of the Halde has indeed validated December 13 of the recommendations designed to "prevent" discrimination to "solve upstream the difficulties in access to insurance", explains Eric Molinié, new President of the independent administrative authority.

Why such an approach For the good and simple reason that the claims of discrimination in access to goods and services, in particular insurance, cease to multiply. They have thus jumped 25 in 2010, according to the dump. In fact, the Authority said be "properly before insurance problems related to gender, age, health status or disability." And to explain "that can be to outright refusal, excessive tariff differences, clauses of exclusion or cessation of coverage beyond a certain age". The independent authority, who regrets the absence of "right to assurance" indicates otherwise see "a higher decision-making application into account of the question, not yet seized by the law, inequalities of access related to social situation or place of residence".

Create a risk Observatory

The subject is sensitive. A such teaches that Cora (orientation and reflection of the insurance Council), the think tank created by Bernard Spitz, the President of the FFSA, spent its last meeting in the regulation of access to the information personal and, therefore, segmentation of the tariffs, enquiring about the opportunity to segment "less, more or otherwise".

Without delay, the dump first asked the Government to establish a risk Observatory 'to the breast of a body public regulation and intervening in the sector". This Observatory would have a double vocation. First, "define the framework in which insurers should register their assessment of the risk". This is far from harmless. Because, in the spirit of the dump, this device, which "guarantee the neutrality and transparency of the process of collection and updating of actuarial and statistical data relating to the criteria of risk, including gender and health", Ricochet "thus would oversee the fixing of premiums and insurance benefits.Observatory would also aim to "punish failure to comply with their commitments under the convention Aeras Editor's Note: ensure and borrow with a health risk Aggravé, giving it a truly binding." The refusal of insurance based on the State of health would continue to grow despite the implementation of the convention, in early 2007.

The dump, advocates for access to the loan, to go further than the convention Aeras and "encourage the lender to accept equivalent to insurance (mortgage, surety) alternative safeguards." She wants that "any refusal of insurance be systematically motivated" principle which would be introduced in the Codes of insurance and mutuality. Finally, it recommends that the different federations to work in the dissemination of information and good practices in the fight against discrimination "including by the conclusion of agreements between associations of users, patients and insurers.