Topic: Auto Insurance

[wing]

Ah yes AV, my spelling can be pretty horrible.

Ovr, basically I have to pay FULL insurance on the vehicle I cannot just get theft and fire because I have a loan.  It doesn't matter that the loan is a small fraction of the cars worth.  Apparently it doesn't matter if the loan is only $1!

[ovr50]

Well, James, if you'll pardon the expression, methinks you're being screwed a bit on that issue - why do you need collision, liability on it if it's parked for the winter. ICBC lets you just put fire/theft on it.

[wing]

Yup

My insurance company requires a letter from the lien holder.  My lien holder will no allow me to remove full coverage.  When Honda was the lien holder I tried, now Royal Bank is the lien holder and it's the same issue.

$300 down the tubes again this winter   Unless I can find the $ to pay off the loan before I store the car..... which is a remote possibility but I won't hold my breath on that one.

[weebl]

"When my boy starts driving in Feb. 06 he's going to pay $4200 for a clunker with no collision. Sorry Demo no sympathy here!"
 
Okay, I'll admit that's crazy.  How (curious, now, not rhetorical) do they justify that?  Because I thought that BC had a fairily high rate of accidents involving teenagers, and thus high rates - but those rates are insane.
 
(But I'm still not a fan of ICBC.)

I'm a little late jumping into this one, Demo, but here's the difference in how the rates are set at ICBC (and probably the same for Manitoba and Saskatchewan government insurance too):

- driving record
- vehicle
- registered "home" of the vehicle
- rate class (usage type - business, commute, pleasure, etc.)

And here's what else the private auto insurers use in determining rates in non-regulated provinces:

- age of driver
- gender of driver
- occupation of driver
- marital status of driver
- claims history of non-fault claims like glass, vandalism, etc.
- total kms driven each year
- who knows what else they can possibly tie to risk

A 16 year old driver in most places would be paying at least three times what you do, Demo.  Though they may not be likable, ICBC isn't the worst of them out there.

When ICBC was created, the goal was to remove the discrimintion in rates in demographic groups, and was supposed to be a not-for-profit public insurer to make rates accessible for every driver.  How much of that is reality is of course open to debate.

[The Mighty Duck]

That makes it pretty clear, thanks.

Remind me to stay in BC when I start working...

[croat]

that's not true about insurance in non regulated provinces. as far as I know insurrance in New Brunswick is non regulated

well couple months ago when I got insurance for my 2001 Jetta, I asked them how they determine price. They told me that starting 2005, they only look at driving record, how long you had licence and driving/claims record

I specifially asked her about sex, status, color of car, etc and she said NO

[weebl]

I specifially asked her about sex, status, color of car, etc and she said NO

I believe this actually was the result of some sort of regulation recently implemented in NB.  Apparently in the recent past, there was a huge government task force set up to determine a solution to skyrocketing insurance.  They rejected status quo, and rejected government insurance a la ICBC, and instead opted for a private system governed by very strict rules.

[kevlounik]

  ;)hi gang, interesting, insurance talks...I work in the industry, there are many insurance myths and lots of what was said is true and some not so true...#1 Insurance IS regulated in ALL provinces and territories..just some more than others, some use tort systems and others "no fault" systems.

Ugh, I hate the fact lean holders will no allow you to store your car in the winter.

I would save $300 over the winter by not insuring my car, but the banks won't allow that!

Some insurance companies offer a certain storing insurance that doesn't necessarilly take collison and Liability off. Liability needs to remain on your vehicle for as long as it is plated. Even though it is parked, if it injures someone...somehow...you don't have to be driving it for something to happen with it... it's a risk that is possible and therefore needs to be assessed.

Not everything in insurance in black and white,there are some grey areas...

As for justifying rates...they do need to justify them,

For great insurance information you can visit www.ibc.ca and www.insurance-canada.ca/consumhome.php, Hope this can help.

[The Mighty Duck]

...you don't have to be driving it for something to happen with it... it's a risk that is possible and therefore needs to be assessed.

Example: if someone steals your car, and ends up in an accident because of a mechanical defect with the car.

I wouldn't be surprised to see a succesful claim there, either.  Reminds me of one in, I think, Ontario where a would-be thief fell through a roof or skylight and successfully sued the homeowner...

[kevlounik]

good example lol, what if the stolen vehicle hits a pedestrian? city property ect...

[No H2O]

Have you ever experienced the private insurance companies in non-regulated provinces?

Yes, and in Ontario, Insurance Companies operate fraudulently. Yes, that is an accusation!

They charge me Accident Benefits Premiums for every vehicle that I licence with NO intention of paying out. I'm already covered for loss of income through my workplace.

I bet a lot of people in the same situation never thought about that. Go and add up AB premiums and see how much they are ripping you off.

Now take retired people on a pension. They get an income till they kick the bucket, yet will never collect any Accident Benefits in the way of loss of incomem, but are paying the AB premiums.

I've already sent a letter to the Minister of Financial Institutions about that issue. Got a reply with plans to make changes. If nothing happens by next spring, I'm planning legal action.

Insurance Companies and Agents...shoot them all! Got no use for them.

[froggy]

 

[No H2O]

If anything, Liability, Accident Benefits should be tied to a Drivers Licence...not a vehicle. This way anyone driving a vehicle, no matter whose, would be covered. All rates would be the same no matter what type of vehicle you own. Drive crazy and cause accidents, you pay more. Drive a Porsche and never have an accident, you pay less than the driver of an Echo that is always having accidents.

The vehicle would only need Collision and Comprehensive coverages.

Totally logical except insurance companies would be making less money. How sad.

[russ_acosta]

good to see a thread started by my bro getting lots of response.  btw, his g6 has been back to the dealer twice!  nyah ha ha!  some faint rattling and a dash light that won't stop blinking.  didn't want to ask, he thinks me was just rubbin it in.

so, which cars are relatively cheaper to insure? all factored in: different insurance companies, different people, different area, etc....  in general, which cars are cheaper to insure and which ones drain yer blood?

[paulk]

You can check prices yourself for various vehicles.  InsuranceHotline.com is a good site for online insurance quotes for Canadians.  Sometimes the results are a bit surprising.  It's cheaper to insure a 1995 Miata than a 1995 Civic, even though you'd think the convertible would probably cost more to insure.