...but being Ontario... we got MODIFIED NO FAULT.
If I were you I would understand what all that means before I bought anymore insurance
... or ******* about insurance
...but being Ontario... we got MODIFIED NO FAULT.
If I were you I would understand what all that means before I bought anymore insurance
... or ******* about insurance
Not sure what you're trying to say since it's censored out. Or if it's even directed at me. I know what no fault insurance means, and that's not what I was mistaking it for. Also, none of us has the option to not buy insurance for our vehicles.
Not sure what you're trying to say since it's censored out. Or if it's even directed at me. I know what no fault insurance means, and that's not what I was mistaking it for. Also, none of us has the option to not buy insurance for our vehicles.
Give me a form to sign that says I will never loan out my bike, they will only ever be ridden by me.
If someone signs and then loans out a bike they are in violation of the agreement and not covered.
Charge me full rate for full coverage on my most expensive bike to insure, add a fire/theft charge for bike #2.
Problem solved.
The only reason this doesn’t happen is greed, plain and simple. Insurance companies know that if someone is in the financial position to have multiple bikes, they likely will regardless of how the insurance is charged. Same way as insurance companies will also charge someone a rate based on how much they think they can charge the client and still get away with it - and please don’t tell me this doesn’t happen because I know it happens.
Insurance in Ontario is corrupt. Anyone trying to convince me it isn’t is lying through their teeth.
Think about this - if someone buys a second house, do they get a break on the price of the house because they already own one? Do they get discounts on hydro, taxes, gas etc because they can only physically be in one at a time? Or do people simply do the math, look at the second home in it's totality and then decide if it's something they would like to pursue?
The cost to your insurer is the same to rebuild either home regardless of where you were that evening.
Think about this - if someone buys a second house, do they get a break on the price of the house because they already own one? Do they get discounts on hydro, taxes, gas etc because they can only physically be in one at a time? Or do people simply do the math, look at the second home in it's totality and then decide if it's something they would like to pursue?
The cost to your insurer is the same to rebuild either home regardless of where you were that evening.
You might want to put some more thought into your analogies:
If I bought 2 houses from the same builder, you can be sure I'd be paying less than if I bought them individually. Besides, we get a policy discount for multiple cars, so why can't we get a discount for multiple bikes?
As for Hydro and gas, it's pay for use, which is exactly what would be fair for insurance. For the time I'm not in the house, I'm probably turning off the lights and lowering the thermostat, therefore my bill would be less than if I lived there full time.
As for the math, yes, I can calculate everything it will cost me to invest in another property and know within a pretty slim margin what all of my non-repair costs will be, including insurance. They don't double or triple or drop my policy out of the blue one year because they decide that my house is too big.
Nobody is arguing about the comprehensive/fire/theft portion. It's the liability, accident benefits, etc. that would never be claimed while its not being ridden.
Think about this - if someone buys a second house, do they get a break on the price of the house because they already own one? Do they get discounts on hydro, taxes, gas etc because they can only physically be in one at a time? Or do people simply do the math, look at the second home in it's totality and then decide if it's something they would like to pursue?
The cost to your insurer is the same to rebuild either home regardless of where you were that evening.
Such a horrible analogy and not even worth my time to go through it all and point out where you’re wrong. You might as well said ‘when you buy 2 gallons of paint vs 1 gallon of paint you pay double’.
Think about this - if someone buys a second house, do they get a break on the price of the house because they already own one? Do they get discounts on hydro, taxes, gas etc because they can only physically be in one at a time? Or do people simply do the math, look at the second home in it's totality and then decide if it's something they would like to pursue?
The cost to your insurer is the same to rebuild either home regardless of where you were that evening.
Insurance Specialist
Thanks, you just confirmed why Ontario motorcycle insurance is as lop-sided as it is, insurance underwriters intentionally turned a blind eye to reality and made insurance into a legalized gambling for profit game. Great work if you can get it.
When was Ontario auto insurance "government run"?
I have never seem a "government run" insurance system that was cheaper. The policy may be cheaper, but the shortfall is made up from general coffers, so NON users end up sponsoring YOUR insurance policy. Lower insurance rates for the driver, higher taxes for ALL.
Nothing the gov't runs will be cheaper, take away the profit motive and efficiency goes with it.
Gov't needs to take a reformer's role in Ontario auto insurance. My wishlist of things that would make things better:
1. Transparency. Insurers should be mandated to disclose payouts and actuarial data to the public
2. Increase personal privacy. Insurers should not be able to share claims or payout information.
3. Open the market to competition. New entrants should not be hogtied by the insurance lobby or onerous regulation designed to limit access to the market.
4. FSCO should have a 'citizen board' that represents Ontario drivers. They should have seats at the director table and have some veto power over regulation and deal making between gov't and the insurance cartel.
5. IBC should not be allowed to coordinate the do's and dont's with respect to policy offerings - individual insurers should be free to innovate.
6. Cap limits on payouts to remove the financial burden of personal injury lawyers, tow operators, body shops, shady rehab centers, and fraudsters.
7. Unhitch liability and personal injury insurance from vehicles and attach it to drivers.
Nothing the gov't runs will be cheaper, take away the profit motive and efficiency goes with it.
Gov't needs to take a reformer's role in Ontario auto insurance. My wishlist of things that would make things better:
1. Transparency. Insurers should be mandated to disclose payouts and actuarial data to the public
2. Increase personal privacy. Insurers should not be able to share claims or payout information.
3. Open the market to competition. New entrants should not be hogtied by the insurance lobby or onerous regulation designed to limit access to the market.
4. FSCO should have a 'citizen board' that represents Ontario drivers. They should have seats at the director table and have some veto power over regulation and deal making between gov't and the insurance cartel.
5. IBC should not be allowed to coordinate the do's and dont's with respect to policy offerings - individual insurers should be free to innovate.
6. Cap limits on payouts to remove the financial burden of personal injury lawyers, tow operators, body shops, shady rehab centers, and fraudsters.
7. Unhitch liability and personal injury insurance from vehicles and attach it to drivers.
1. Actuarial data is their competitive intelligence. If company A experiences high claims with a certain segment they may want to bow out quietly while allowing their competitor's to take on what they perceive as a higher risk.
2. this is each of our personal track records. Much like creditors share your credit history to assess your credit risk, our driving history plays a part in our risk factors as it relates to driving.
3. The market is open. The regulation is to make sure that an insurer can actually cover their positions on all these policies if they are called upon.
4. ???
5. The Ontario Auto policy is written by the Ontario Government. It is legislated.
6. On one hand I like this idea, on the other when a person is truly injured, shouldn't the injured person have some sort of recourse?
7. Liability follows everyone - the driver & the registered owner... that can only be changed through legal channels, not through the insurance industry.
Think about this - if someone buys a second house, do they get a break on the price of the house because they already own one? Do they get discounts on hydro, taxes, gas etc because they can only physically be in one at a time? Or do people simply do the math, look at the second home in it's totality and then decide if it's something they would like to pursue?
The cost to your insurer is the same to rebuild either home regardless of where you were that evening.
Has anyone insured their second bike with TD they just told me that I could insure my second bike for as little as a day
so let’s say I insured my second bike my Bonneville for September their cancellation policy for September is they retain 10%.
Has anyone actually done a short term insurance with TD and paid that little? Or do you end up canceling at the end of your short term and get raped by TD?
To put some numbers around this they quote me 637 annual that includes multi bike etc. etc. they tell me I have to pay 301 for the rest of this insurance year year which is September through end of January. OK so this is great. If I ensure for just September am I really only paying 64 bucks. Because that simply amazing
Has anyone insured their second bike with TD they just told me that I could insure my second bike for as little as a day
so let’s say I insured my second bike my Bonneville for September their cancellation policy for September is they retain 10%.
Has anyone actually done a short term insurance with TD and paid that little? Or do you end up canceling at the end of your short term and get raped by TD?
To put some numbers around this they quote me 637 annual that includes multi bike etc. etc. they tell me I have to pay 301 for the rest of this insurance year year which is September through end of January. OK so this is great. If I ensure for just September am I really only paying 64 bucks. Because that simply amazing
10% sounds more like the prorated percentage for September. But if they told you specifically the minimum retained premium is 10%, then you would be charged $63.70 if you were to cancel it the day after you started the policy. But you should probably be asking them to clarify their terms, using specific examples that resemble your use case. Their calls are all recorded so whatever they say is on the record.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
is somebody going to trip over one and sue you or what?