In reply to Dave Garnett:
I'm quite interested in this... personally I see climbing and mountaineering as being about assessing and managing risks, not taking them.
I tend to assume that risk in climbing is fairly self limiting - none of us go out to kill ourselves and everybody tends to participate inside their limits. Clearly that sometimes goes wrong, and some individuals operating at the ragged edge exist, but on average.....
And then to counteract the above, I also assume that I am a very low risk as I don't do a lot of the stuff that insures assume everybody does... i.e. I go out drinking in the big city about twice per year - most insurers probably assume that most adults do 2 nights per week 'on the town' with all the associated risks of that to health, longevity and possibility of drunken damage to self etc. I don't 'do' football so I'm never in a crowd of drunken folk some of whom are looking for match day trouble, I'm fit and active whereas the average population is less so. etc, etc.
So - it's a bit of an annoyance that they basically take an 'average risk' then start lumping on badly thought out extras to cover my 'risky' stuff, without nocking anything off for all the good stuff I do and all the possibly bad stuff I avoid.
I'm thoroughly of belief that I'm much more likely to end up damaged/falling under a bus/mugged/or just fat and unfit and unhealthy if I partook of 'normal' city life and didn't do my outdoor lifestyle for which I get no credit.
Oh - and OP - I'm with Vitality via Summit and was happy with how they defined what I do. Premiums don't seem 'to bad'....
Post edited at 14:33