penalties for bad drivers

[Technix]

Originally Posted by Avana

now if they could only work on giving more discounts to good drivers!

The theory behind it is that it will mean MORE discounts to good drivers from the extra premiums collected...in case you didn't connect A to B there...

[Technix]

Originally Posted by esoter1c

Plain and simple this won't make people drive better.

It will only make ICBC richer.

Biggest Monopoly in BC.

You don't seem to have a grasp on what a Crown Corporation means.

ICBC is mandated not to make a profit. All additional revenues are placed into the Autoplan fund to make rates lower for all drivers. ICBC does not make any money. The only real costs that ICBC has is for claims, operations and road safety...plain and simple.

[Technix]

Originally Posted by esoter1c

WTF do you think happens when you say ICBC is NON PROFIT.

I prove you wrong.

You proved no one wrong. To be considered "PROFIT", one has to realize a return, and can in turn spend the "PROFIT" in any way they wish. In this case, ICBC is limited to either lowering rates, investing to protect themselves financially from catastrophic loss, and/or investing in road safety initiatives. ICBC can't just piss the money away on blow-up dolls and dildos....give your head a shake. ICBC cannot profit by mandate.

Originally Posted by esoter1c

ICBC does profit, alot, and it doesn't come back to us in any way, not in rebates or anything.

ICBC cannot profit. What you are referring to is a "SURPLUS". Private insurance companies can profit. ICBC cannot.

You seem to forget that ICBC in 2005 reduced rates overall by $130 million while the company lossed over half a billion in the early 2000s due to spikes in claims costs and bodily injury claims. Claims costs are going up and that is the reality. A standard bodily injury claim that would settle at $10,000 may be ordered by the courts to be $50,000 after it is all said and done - the courts are a challenge that they face with larger scale losses. Insurance companies building reserves to protect against catastrophic losses - they have to, or they go down. ICBC is accountable to the public, they wouldn't really be able to help much if they were up to their eyeballs in the shit with no reserves and tens of thousands of claims to pay out.

Let's say they have a catastrophic year and half of BC's 3 million drivers have a claim with an average cost of $2000. That's a staggering $3 BILLION in claims payouts - that's not even factoring in road safety and operating costs. Do you see why they have to build reserves so high? Think about it...if they didn't and such a loss occurred, bye bye ICBC.

Originally Posted by esoter1c

they bought Surrey Central and sold it, wait for it, for PROFIT !

...another measure to build their reserves against catastrophic loss, for which they realize a one-time $250 million gain...could be simply spent paying claims, operating costs and making road safety improvements.

You might want to review their financials so you know what the fuck you're talking about...insurance is a simple concept. Get your shit straight.

[KrisisID]

Originally Posted by alla

What I was trying to say is try to think how many private insurance companies there are that are very competitive with ICBC and other insurance companies who offer better coverage for a lower rate and possibly with lower cost of a deductible.

the crazy thing about this is that the private companies find any which way how to deny your claim. i've had my run ins with a few companies, ICBC is definitely the lesser of the evils, it has more money to offer when needed, which means their less likely to deny claims. whereas private companies have money to make, so their more likely to find reasons to deny claims.

[KrisisID]

Just to have my two cents in on this topic...

If ICBC is supposed to use "Profit" to put towards lowering insurance rates. Then why is it that a few years ago we heard that since ICBC had a surplus of "X" million dollars, the corporation decided to give bonuses to its employees to get rid of the Surplus. Mind you, those bonuses were HUGE if i can recall.

[Digital Over]

^ yes, that's very true. I was on this team which ICBC asked to have formed, in order to address a new system for the GLP program, the team came up with about 10 points, boiled it down to top 3 (using data which they had given us, also keeping in mind viability/admin/implementation, of course) and they shot down every one, saying it wouldn't be viable! That hasn't been the first time too I might add. Based from past experience...its not a good idea unless ICBC thinks of it. I was baffled to see that they kept any time reduction at all for taking an approved course, as ICBC had already been told from the gov. that having time reduction as a reward for taking a program is a lost cause anyways! EPIC FAIL

[Technix]

Originally Posted by KrisisID

the crazy thing about this is that the private companies find any which way how to deny your claim. i've had my run ins with a few companies, ICBC is definitely the lesser of the evils, it has more money to offer when needed, which means their less likely to deny claims. whereas private companies have money to make, so their more likely to find reasons to deny claims.

Speaking of the money they make...did you know private insurance companies handle absolutely ZERO injury claims? ICBC handles 'em all.

And people why private companies can offer $100 deductibles and ICBC no longer does...that would be why. They only have to pay out for vehicle damage and some investigation expenses. Injury and accident benefit claims are paid through third party liability (the basic which everyone buys). Suck it up folks, until judges start capping injury claims insurance rates won't be falling fast, if at all.

[Vitamin-X]

hmmm.
It wonder if this has anything to do with ICBC losing about 65 million dollars in the US housing credit crunch.

[esoter1c]

Originally Posted by Technix

...another measure to build their reserves against catastrophic loss, for which they realize a one-time $250 million gain...could be simply spent paying claims, operating costs and making road safety improvements.

$250 million dollar GAIN !?

You call it gain I call it PROFIT.

I'm soooooooooo sure they payed out claims and made the roads safer instead of giving themselves raises & hookers & blow.

You fucking nitwit.

All those trance lazers have fried your tiny little mind.

[Bryan M]

The only input i have on this right now is that i find it a TAD unfair having notices going out to drivers with a 5 year infraction on there record. I slid off the road (yes doing a super cool ebrake) and hit a stop sign when i was 16. I lost my license for 3 months. Now being 22 years old and having 6 years of safe driving, i received a notice specifiying "due to your bad driving habits we would like to issue you this notice warning you of dangerous driving penalties coming into effec Jan 1sty 2008" etc.

I do agree that they should be cracking down on bad driving habits, and its good to see, but i think they could be putting a bit more effort into the filtering out the bad vs the moderate.

Not a huge chanllenging point, but, my 2 cents.

cheers :)

[esoter1c]

Originally Posted by Senior

we give proof, you make baseless accusations, and we're the nitwits? sure buddy!!

You make sense when it comes to seeing the American gov't is bullshit.

But you sure suck this "Crown Corp's" dick deep.

I don't give a fuck what "proof" you think you have.

You say some bullshit weasle word like "gain".

All I see is "profit" for Crown.

Do you wear that crown ?

You sure seem to think you do.

[Vitamin-X]

hmm
While I don't doubt that ICBC executives are enjoying large bonuses, spending accounts, maybe Swedish touch gift certificates.....

Ultimately, private companies would be chasing profit 100% so I don't see how there would be great savings by switching to a private system.

[esoter1c]

Can you show me where I said I wanted privatization ?

I want lower rates.

END OF !

[manousos]

$29 in QC got me 2.5 mil liability
$85 in BC gets me less than %10 of that

I didn't own a car for 9 years (but drove frequently) in mtl because I lived within walking distance of work/school/consistent transit system

now I have to pay the same premiums as someone half my age

fuck that robbery

[Technix]

Originally Posted by esoter1c

Can you show me where I said I wanted privatization ?

I want lower rates.

END OF !

Quit being a piss-poor driver and maybe you will save more. Or you can move to any other eastern province and pay 2-4 times more a year for the same coverage, crotch pheasant.

A private system keeps all the fucking money. You should be bitching about them, look at a company like Family or Canadian Direct and see how much of your money they will keep, especially the executives. ICBC's CEO only makes $300K/year and private company CEOs are making millions. Also try having one claim with them and be lucky if they decide to reinsure you ever again. Before digging at a publically funded insurance model which all of north america should have, and clearly you've made up all of your notions from all the drugs you've absorbed rectally, you should think about what you're saying and if it is logical.

Read up on the history of auto insurance in this country...I'm sure when you're done you'll look at ICBC in a better light and why it is necessary.

Pay the premium and get on with your life. ICBC isn't the BC Lottery Corporation, people need to quit seeing dollar signs everytime they have an accident..."JACKPOT SYNDROME". If it were as easy as a spin of a bottle to determine your settlement, you'd be paying a whole lot more to drive, that is a guarantee.

[lowski]

insurance companies are about money and money only. anything they do (no matter how good it seems). it's just to make more money plane and simple. icbc is a huge hustle that, sadly the costumer has no control over.

[Carrie]

ICBC is fixing my car on Monday!

[esoter1c]

Originally Posted by Technix

Crotch pheasant.

You must shit pure fail.