On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 23:02:20 +0000, Ann wrote:

- quote -

What's the impairment???? There is none in my case

I am nearsighted with 3 diopter difference between eyes, amblyopic (right
eye is my dominant eye)

I drive, fly a plane just as good as a person without amblyopia

Allen

On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 19:17:13 -0700, "Mark A" <nobody[at]nowhere.comwrote:

- quote -

ROFL.. No. Not everything in the UK is government run.

Ann

"Ann" <me[at]privacy.net> wrote in message
news:fio3221eu6kpq1khqd5rjtng44fhgeim4n[at]4ax.com...
- quote -

I think that it has been made very clear that it does not work that way in
the USA.

Even in cases where an insurance company in the USA does charge more for
amblyopia (which I am not aware of), the insurance company can only demand
retroactive payment of the additional premiums (probably only for the last
insurable period), they cannot deny a claim (unless they can prove fraud).
But I am not sure if they can even demand retroactive premiums if they don't
at least ask about these issues in the application for insurance.

Since driving records are publicly available in the US, insurance companies
depend more on your accident and traffic ticket rate than on medical issues
(in most cases). They also do the underwriting based on other factors such
as miles driven weekly, the exact model and year of the car, age of driver,
martial status (in some cases for men under 25), location, years insured
with current company, and some other factors.

Are drivers in the UK insured by the government? That may explain the
non-disclosure issue. In the USA, insurance is a private business and it is
up to the insurance company to ask consumers about the underwriting factors
that they need to determine your premiums.

The other thing that you wrong about (in previous posts you have made) is
comparing accident rates of people with only one eye with accident rates for
people with amblyopia. That is an incorrect use of statistics since the
conditions are not the same.

On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 20:07:49 -0800, Dan Abel <dabel[at]sonic.net> wrote:

- quote -

We're not talking about driving licences we're talking about
insurance. And I have no idea what happens in the states but I do
know what happens here. Not being asked about a certain disorder is
no defence here. Non disclosure is non disclosure.

Ann

In article <4ucu121oaqv5ollik4fmrlh6if456gb5km[at]4ax.com> ,
Ann <me[at]privacy.net> wrote:


- quote -

It's no secret. Both my wife and I don't use our right eyes. We both
have forms signed by our OD's on file with the State of California
Department of Motor Vehicles stating that, and that it isn't
correctable. We both subsequently took driving tests with a DMV
examiner to prove that we could drive with just one eye.

We have valid driver's licenses, with the complete understanding that we
see out of one eye only.

--
Dan Abel
dabel[at]sonic.net
Petaluma, California, USA

"Ann" <me[at]privacy.net> wrote in message
news:4ucu121oaqv5ollik4fmrlh6if456gb5km[at]4ax.com...
- quote -

I have been insured by the same company for 28 years and they have never
asked me, and I don't think it needs to be declared. My driving record
during that time has been way above average with only 1 minor accident.

About 20 years ago the state (who issued drivers licenses) tested both eyes
during the eye exam, but that is no longer the case.

On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 14:26:08 -0700, "Mark A" <nobody[at]nowhere.comwrote:

- quote -

Probably not, but it's still a visual impairment that ought to be
declared. It's not only about peripheral vision. I don't know what
insurers are like over there, but here they will do anything to get
out of paying out on a claim and non declaration of a visual
impairment is playing right into their hands.

Ann

"Ann" <me[at]privacy.net> wrote in message
news:nufr12lg61ljrvd1rs66eo1oje0u8ksvmd[at]4ax.com...
- quote -

A person with amblyopia does not have one eye. The lazy eye still provides
the equivalent of peripheral vision in most cases. I don't think those stats
you cited were compiled with people who have amblyopia.

On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 16:28:16 -0800, Dan Abel <dabel[at]sonic.net> wrote:

- quote -

Don't anybody try that in the UK. I used to ride a motorbike and the
insurance was far more for a one eyed person than normal. If I hadn't
declared it, I wouldn't have been covered.

I recently read that one eyed people in the states have 7 times more
road traffic accidents than two eyed people. I can't imagine that
you're supposed to keep it secret.

Ann

In article <1142709181.327060.286060[at]z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> ,
"sanju" <tsanju[at]hotmail.com> wrote:

- quote -

No. Of course, they didn't ask and she didn't volunteer the information.

--
Dan Abel
dabel[at]sonic.net
Petaluma, California, USA