Car backed into and dumped my bike just now - what to do?

[Wasted]

Forum Sponsor

For a bike you couldn't even claim someone tipped it over (by hand) as an act of vandalism because "tips over" is part of collision coverage. Which is stupid. Guess I should've read that closer.

Unless there is malicious intent. If my bike was tipped I'd be sure to uhhhhh 'witness' someone tip it and flee the scene. If they tried to tell you that THAT is a collision I would tell them that the proximate cause was the unknown vandals attack on the bike and it's there for a clear cut vandalism comp claim.

 

[unL33T]

Unless there is malicious intent. If my bike was tipped I'd be sure to uhhhhh 'witness' someone tip it and flee the scene. If they tried to tell you that THAT is a collision I would tell them that the proximate cause was the unknown vandals attack on the bike and it's there for a clear cut vandalism comp claim.

If you're going to take that approach than this guy should've just said he saw some guys tip it over and run away, resulting in all the damages.

The document says nothing about intent so I'd assume you'd have a hard time gettingit covered under aanything other than collision, where it's specifically mentioned.

 

[Face]

You committed insurance fraud and got caught. Lucky you didn't get charged with it (which rarely happens).

Please, explain to me how I committed insurance fraud. I was relaying an incident where I made an insurance claim for a not-at-fault accident, and then got dinged for an increase. Where is the fraud (on my part) in that?

 

[Wasted]

If you're going to take that approach than this guy should've just said he saw some guys tip it over and run away, resulting in all the damages.

The document says nothing about intent so I'd assume you'd have a hard time gettingit covered under aanything other than collision, where it's specifically mentioned.

It would really depend on the type of adjuster you get and how they interpret the policy. As far as I am concerned if the proximate cause of the bike tipping is something covered by comp than I'd cover it under comp. I mean if the bike gets tipped over there's only one place for it to end up right. A kickstand sinking into pavement is going to be at fault collision but not a bike pushed over. imo.

 

[unL33T]

Please, explain to me how I committed insurance fraud. I was relaying an incident where I made an insurance claim for a not-at-fault accident, and then got dinged for an increase. Where is the fraud (on my part) in that?

Failed to disclose your tickets. You can be dropped for non disclosure and it's very hard to get insurance after. They established the contract with you based on the information you established and you either gave them fraudulent info by not disclosing it or broke that contract later by not disclosing it. Not a big deal to me and obviously it worked out mostly ok for you but there is potential for much worse to happen than just some higher rates.

 

[Face]

Fair enough, I may not have chosen the best words. I wasn't trying to debate whether the speed limits were adequate, I was only speaking to the way a policy is rated and not whether it was right or wrong. I personally believe that things like expired stickers and insurance slips, even seat belt tickets should not be rated for because they're not indicators of driving habits. but I digress.
I work for a company who's mandate is to always try and find coverage for insureds and use denials as a last resort and wouldn't work for a company who's philosophy was the other way around. It's company-wide that we don't MVR not at faults because like I stated before, we're not trying to catch tickets. We're trying to make sure that the at fault driver had a valid license on the date of loss. I work in one of the most hated professional careers that I can think of so I do get my back up from time to time but there are good guys out there who are truly looking out for drivers and all of my insurance related posts are merely trying to show that.

Sorry, I got my back up with that "deserved" comment. I'm amazed that there is a company out there that has a policy to not check MVRs for not-at-fault claims. Unfortunately there are a lot of insurance horror stories and industry focus on profit http://www.lawtimesnews.com/201305062822/focus-on/focus-insurance-company-profits-under-microscope There are legitimate reasons that your profession is hated. I'm glad to see some places still leave room for the input and judgement of reasonable individuals. Hopefully your company allows you to act on your "personal beliefs". Otherwise they'll become personal frustrations and the industry could lose a good person.

 

[wideiris]

Here's what happened today: called insurance company. she said 'take it in and decide from there, nothing will go on file until you proceed'. So i took it to the collision reporting station, where the officer rightly noted that there will be a serious cost to the the rewiring of all the lights and clutch. Part of the faring is cracked, lots of little things. He put damage at $1100. Called insurance and she said, as it's comprehensive, it doesn't count against you as an accident. your rates won't go up, it will have no impact on your discounts. there was no disincentive to do it. so i'm taking it to the shop to have it fully fixed up, just having to pay the deductible ($300). MUCH more than i was expecting to spend on groceries when i popped into the store that day.

 

[unL33T]

Strange. Comprehensive is what I said would happen but then the documents were shown that proved me wrong and I even called my insurance company to confirm and they also told me I was wrong. Glad it worked out for you though.

What insurance company are you with?

 

[Wasted]

Yup. That's just not right, but if it saves you $200 than just roll with it lol.

 

[DemonPig]

I went through insurance 3 times for not-at-fault accidents. The premium does NOT go up. I don't know what some of you guys are talking about. Insurance companies cannot charge you for every claim you make. That's the whole point of having insurance. If you cause the accident - different story.

 

[unL33T]

I went through insurance 3 times for not-at-fault accidents. The premium does NOT go up. I don't know what some of you guys are talking about. Insurance companies cannot charge you for every claim you make. That's the whole point of having insurance. If you cause the accident - different story.

Not at fault collisions are different than hit and runs. The one guy's insurance didn't go up for his not at fault claim but because they found tickets on his record. I've also had several not at faults and my rates also did not rise. I was told that if I make too many (over 3 a year) I could become classified as higher risk and then my rates would go up.

Also, on the topic of insurance companies not checking your record, I went through 3 companies over 5 years before one finally checked my record and found out my old company from 5 years ago had put in a bunch of my not at fault claims as at fault claims so they must not check often. Luckily I got it sorted out fairly quickly but I couldn't get insurance for about 3 days until it was sorted.

 

[AL3RT]

Yup. That's just not right, but if it saves you $200 than just roll with it lol.

Hey Wasted, is there a such thing as "high risk" in insurance business when it comes to a consumer evaluation?

Let's say an insured individual keeps submitting not at fault claims, including "hit and run" accidents and vandalism, year after year, doesn't this eventually raise a red flag with the insurer? Say, they can't increase his premium because of absence of "at fault collisions" on his part, however, can they simply drop him/not renew?
Call it a bad luck or whatever, the bottom line is he ends up costing them more than his annual payments are.

 

[Wasted]

Hey Wasted, is there a such thing as "high risk" in insurance business when it comes to a consumer evaluation?

Let's say an insured individual keeps submitting not at fault claims, including "hit and run" accidents and vandalism, year after year, doesn't this eventually raise a red flag with the insurer? Say, they can't increase his premium because of absence of "at fault collisions" on his part, however, can they simply drop him/not renew?
Call it a bad luck or whatever, the bottom line is he ends up costing them more than his annual payments are.

The Gov't of Ontario sets out regulations that insurers must follow. These regulations state that the insurer can not non-renew a policy holder unless they don't meet specific underwriting guidelines. Because comp and NAF claims are not rateable they can't just 'drop' clients. Instead, chronic claimers will likey see their minimum allowable deductibles raised. So instead of a $500 collision deductible and a $300 comp deductible you may be renewed with $1000/$1000 as your only option. Also, when considering any type of accommodation, the first question is usually something like what is the risk profile like and what is the loss ratio (ie permium in vs claims dollars out). The less you cost the more pull you have if you need a favour

 

[Face]

Failed to disclose your tickets. You can be dropped for non disclosure and it's very hard to get insurance after. They established the contract with you based on the information you established and you either gave them fraudulent info by not disclosing it or broke that contract later by not disclosing it. Not a big deal to me and obviously it worked out mostly ok for you but there is potential for much worse to happen than just some higher rates.

Seriously, the company sends you a renewal, you look at it and then call them and tell them the rate is too low because you got a conviction a few months ago! PM me, I've got some land you may be interested in, Lol! It's a matter of public record, and their responsibility to look it up and use it if they wish.

 

[AL3RT]

The Gov't of Ontario sets out regulations that insurers must follow. These regulations state that the insurer can not non-renew a policy holder unless they don't meet specific underwriting guidelines. Because comp and NAF claims are not rateable they can't just 'drop' clients. Instead, chronic claimers will likey see their minimum allowable deductibles raised. So instead of a $500 collision deductible and a $300 comp deductible you may be renewed with $1000/$1000 as your only option. Also, when considering any type of accommodation, the first question is usually something like what is the risk profile like and what is the loss ratio (ie permium in vs claims dollars out). The less you cost the more pull you have if you need a favour

Informative answer. Does presence of modifications to the bike qualify as "specific underwriting guidelines"?

 

[Wasted]

Informative answer. Does presence of modifications to the bike qualify as "specific underwriting guidelines"?

It could but it depends on what you're talking about. I have a double bubble, steering damper, solo cover, speedo healer, heated grips, passenger handles......none of those require a call to your agent or broker. They're more concerned about major engine mods, nitrous, significant performance enhancement etc.

 

[unL33T]

It could but it depends on what you're talking about. I have a double bubble, steering damper, solo cover, speedo healer, heated grips, passenger handles......none of those require a call to your agent or broker. They're more concerned about major engine mods, nitrous, significant performance enhancement etc.

Several companies told me they wouldn't cover a bike lowered for the purpose of being able to flat foot it. Said the reduced ground clearance and potential affect on handling was too dangerous.

I also had a cousin with a lifted truck that he couldn't get affordable insurance on because it was lifted.

 

[ncaissie]

Google search the local accident report center in your area, and bring the bike there and fill out an accident report....Then call your insurance if you plan to claim the damage, they will tell you to take it to a shop for a quote. Once you bring it to a shop the insurance company sends an adjuster there to compare their quote with the shops quote, if the shop is within their rage they give the go ahead to fix it...If its too much they either request another shop to quote it, or its over the reasonable cost of repair for the value of the bike and they write it off and pay you out...

That is not true. You have the right to have your vehicle repaired any place you want. Maybe you should read your policy.
Take it to someone you trust to do the work properly.

 

[unL33T]

That is not true. You have the right to have your vehicle repaired any place you want. Maybe you should read your policy.
Take it to someone you trust to do the work properly.

He didn't say you couldn't take it to whoever you want. He just said they'd tell you to get a different quote. I've had an adjuster tell me that if I can't find a shop to fix it below a certain cost they would just write off the car. The only way I kept that car (which just had a minor dent) was by finding a friend whose cousin owned a body shop and he reduced his quote from $1k (after the adjuster refused that number) down to about $200 because that's all insurance would pay and he wanted to help me out. Told me he lost money on that and the only reason it cost so much was because the first shop botched the job so bad.

I then dropped that company and in the process got CC'd on an email where the broker called me "annoying" because I asked him questions to make sure I was legit with my insurance (questions about mods and whatnot) and got quotes for lots of vehicles. Now their company is missing out on the income they could've got from a single male living in Toronto that owns 3 (sometimes 4) vehicles just for himself.

 

[Wasted]

Several companies told me they wouldn't cover a bike lowered for the purpose of being able to flat foot it. Said the reduced ground clearance and potential affect on handling was too dangerous.

I also had a cousin with a lifted truck that he couldn't get affordable insurance on because it was lifted.

Anything that changes the manufacturers original specs. If you change engine or handling characteristic and something on the bike fails and causes an accident, the manufacturer can say 'we never intended the bike to perform like that and that's why it failed".
It doesn't sound like much but if you have something like a sprocket sheer and that causes you to lose control and kill a family an insurance company could be on the hook for millions. If the bike failing caused the accident they'd try and recoup the money from the manufacturer. But mods that affect the original specs could potentially take the manufacturer off of the hook.

Forum Sponsor