condo security

Forum Sponsor
ZX600 said:
Lisa I like you but that is just ridiculous :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

How would it be any different than the surcharge given to sport bikers just for the privilege to ride. Insurance companies have shown that a super sport is more likely to be in an accident. The higher risk of theft is there, and you're not forced to get theft insurance. you're not forced to ride a super sport, you're not forced to live in a multi dwelling building. There is no entitlement there if the insurance companies show that they pay out way more in thefts to people that live in condos than in a house. maybe the increased cost might make living in a house or alternate storage solutions more affordable.
 
ZX600 said:
Lisa I like you but that is just ridiculous :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

How so? If the claims history shows that there is a significantly higher probability of a theft claim from those parking their bikes in condos, why shouldnt they have their premiums adjusted accordingly?

Its not like bikes arent stolen from home garages, but Id be willing to wager its ALOT LESS likely.
 
Would condos be amicable to a storage locker type thing in the parking spot? something like a shipping container. i know they only come in 20-ft (6.1 m), 40-ft (12.2 m), 45-ft (13.7 m), 48-ft (14.6 m), and 53-ft (16.2 m) lengths but I'm sure something custom for condos could be easily mass produced allowing a bike (or something else small) to be kept at the wall end of a parking spot. It doesn't have to be motorcycle specific, kind of like a shed for condo/apartment dwellers. I know it wouldn't stop all thefts, but it would cut down on thefts. and rather than use padlocks that can be easily broken the units could have an insertable key (again not fool proof but better than a padlock) and even an alarm system. Yes, those extras would increase the cost of these sheds, but i'm just throwing out ideas here. I think condosheds would be a great selling feature for condos. I know a lot of condo's and apartments offer some sort of storage rooms. but the apartments i've lived in have either had them inconvenient in that you have to talk to the super to get access to them, or they're too small, or they aren't really suitable to storing and accessing bulky items.
 
Bandit Bill said:
How so, i wish you would have elaborated?

I think the point that she makes is quite valid, and i share the same viewpoint. Condo owners appear to be making the vast majority of claims for theft cases - which indicate that they are more vulnerable by their choice of housing, and at the same time taxing the insurance pool disproportionally in terms of the theft rates/claims.

Those who carry the burden of costs, should pay proportionally. Simple concept. Right now, Condo owners don't - insurance claim costs are generally spread out among all housing types in the insurance zone that ratings are calculated for, therefore increasing the insurance burden for all people in that pool, regardless of housing type or security.

Why should i be paying more for theft insurance, while i secure my crap securely and appropriately, while others skate by on my share of the dime because of their piss-poor choice of housing, and an expensive toy stored inappropriately and unsecurely?
Click to expand...
I did elaborate on a conversation with her for over an hour, no need to bring it into a pissing match on this board
 
ZX600 said:
I did elaborate on a conversation with her for over an hour, no need to bring it into a pissing match on this board
Click to expand...

And not being able to mind-read Lisa, and with you making a counter-statement to her position in a very vague way.. i'd assumed that by posting it to a public forum, you were looking for public comment.

Apparently not.

In any case, your position is flawed and centric upon your lifestyle, rather than the overall picture of the issue at hand of an insurance burden being forced upon a pool, rather than the problem being assessed and surcharged correctly as being condo-specific.
 
I don't like any of this one bit.:p
 
Bandit Bill said:
And not being able to mind-read Lisa, and with you making a counter-statement to her position in a very vague way.. i'd assumed that by posting it to a public forum, you were looking for public comment.

Apparently not.

In any case, your position is flawed and centric upon your lifestyle, rather than the overall picture of the issue at hand of an insurance burden being forced upon a pool, rather than the problem being assessed and surcharged correctly as being condo-specific.
Click to expand...
Actually no, I wasn't looking for a public debate, or a GTAM pissing contest, because at the end we all have our opinions and I have yet to see someone changing anyone else opinion on this forum.

Her and I had a pretty good smart conversation about it, sorry I am getting tired of having these arguments in here and getting stupid comments from the peanut gallery

As an example, you are already saying my opinion is flawed and you haven't even heard my arguments yet! quite funny so sorry if you are not getting to debate against me

Maybe next time when I'm in a better mood ;)
 
Last edited:
Bandit Bill said:
How so, i wish you would have elaborated?

I think the point that she makes is quite valid, and i share the same viewpoint. Condo owners appear to be making the vast majority of claims for theft cases - which indicate that they are more vulnerable by their choice of housing, and at the same time taxing the insurance pool disproportionally in terms of the theft rates/claims.

Those who carry the burden of costs, should pay proportionally. Simple concept. Right now, Condo owners don't - insurance claim costs are generally spread out among all housing types in the insurance zone that ratings are calculated for, therefore increasing the insurance burden for all people in that pool, regardless of housing type or security.

Why should i be paying more for theft insurance, while i secure my crap securely and appropriately, while others skate by on my share of the dime because of their piss-poor choice of housing, and an expensive toy stored inappropriately and unsecurely?
Click to expand...

x 2

and futher I would like to find out of all the bikes stolen, how many of them actually had some sort of additional security?
I'm going to guess very few if any...
 
The ones that were stolen had no additional security, like a good chain or alarm.
I have noticed in all previous threads when any OP says"my bike was stolen from my condo" they never say it was chained.
Go ahead and look back a few years on all the threads.
Its the same pattern.
It would be a first to hear that "my bike was stolen from my condo and it was securely chained to a post with an Almax chain!!!"
This is the solution to all, CHAIN YOUR BIKE TO A POST (with a really good quality chain and lock.)
It will not get stolen.
 
macrider said:
The ones that were stolen had no additional security, like a good chain or alarm.
I have noticed in all previous threads when any OP says"my bike was stolen from my condo" they never say it was chained.
Go ahead and look back a few years on all the threads.
Its the same pattern.
It would be a first to hear that "my bike was stolen from my condo and it was securely chained to a post with an Almax chain!!!"
This is the solution to all, CHAIN YOUR BIKE TO A POST (with a really good quality chain and lock.)
It will not get stolen.
Click to expand...

Have said it before will say it again. Chain, cover, alarm if you want to keep your bike.

The cover and alarm keeps them from casing the bike out (you need both otherwise they will lift the cover and check it out). The chain will slow them down. Do all three or please take the theft insurance off the bike so it does not cost the rest of us money (higher premiums).

I have seen posts here where a bike with one of the above deterrents was stolen never with all three.
 
I'm so sick of people telling condo dwellers to chain their bikes completely ignoring the fact that in general condo bylaws prohibit you from installing anchors in your parking spot. So unless your parking spot happens to have a column next to it, you're out of luck. Furthermore, even if you do have a big column, chances are, the chains you can purchase to lock up your bike are not sufficiently long to wrap around those giant columns. Covers and alarms are obviously perfectly valid points.

If we're going to have condo dwellers pay higher insurance premiums on their bikes, can we also make sure that home insurance is adjusted as well? After all, the majority of break ins happen with freestanding houses and not condos.
 
Qualdoth said:
I'm so sick of people telling condo dwellers to chain their bikes completely ignoring the fact that in general condo bylaws prohibit you from installing anchors in your parking spot. So unless your parking spot happens to have a column next to it, you're out of luck. Furthermore, even if you do have a big column, chances are, the chains you can purchase to lock up your bike are not sufficiently long to wrap around those giant columns. Covers and alarms are obviously perfectly valid points.

If we're going to have condo dwellers pay higher insurance premiums on their bikes, can we also make sure that home insurance is adjusted as well? After all, the majority of break ins happen with freestanding houses and not condos.
Click to expand...
Home insurance is more expensive than insurance for apartments.
 
Qualdoth said:
I'm so sick of people telling condo dwellers to chain their bikes completely ignoring the fact that in general condo bylaws prohibit you from installing anchors in your parking spot. So unless your parking spot happens to have a column next to it, you're out of luck. Furthermore, even if you do have a big column, chances are, the chains you can purchase to lock up your bike are not sufficiently long to wrap around those giant columns. Covers and alarms are obviously perfectly valid points.

If we're going to have condo dwellers pay higher insurance premiums on their bikes, can we also make sure that home insurance is adjusted as well? After all, the majority of break ins happen with freestanding houses and not condos.
Click to expand...

You are complaining that a security measure is out of your control, and that you will be penalized if you cannot utilize it. Tough. It is your choice to live in a Condo, and own a theft desireable motorcycle. It is not the choice of those in the pool, who are subsidizing your inability to adapt and compromise. Sell the bike, and get something less theft worthy, or move.

As Cruisngrrl already said, standalone housing already pays appropriately higher house/occupant insurance - in any case, the appropriately stored and secured motorcycles in my garage is not covered by it.
 
Last edited:
Qualdoth said:
I'm so sick of people telling condo dwellers to chain their bikes completely ignoring the fact that in general condo bylaws prohibit you from installing anchors in your parking spot. So unless your parking spot happens to have a column next to it, you're out of luck. Furthermore, even if you do have a big column, chances are, the chains you can purchase to lock up your bike are not sufficiently long to wrap around those giant columns. Covers and alarms are obviously perfectly valid points.

If we're going to have condo dwellers pay higher insurance premiums on their bikes, can we also make sure that home insurance is adjusted as well? After all, the majority of break ins happen with freestanding houses and not condos.
Click to expand...

For a big pole, get a heavy chain in a bulk length.

There are dozens of ways to attach a bike to something that cannot be moved or is very hard to move or makes the bike hard to move (think outside the box):

-Buy a second non-working $100 POS bike and lock the good bike to that one with a short chain (now they must cut the chain or bring more guys to lift both bikes).
-PL (glue) a plate to the wall/floor if you do not want to drill, make it look like it is bolted (fake bolts). Point here is to make them think it is fully anchored.
-Leave a few cinder blocks in the spot to lock the bike to (this they will tell you to not do since they hate "garbage" in the parking spots). Hide them under the bike cover when you are riding, behind the bike when parked.
-Get a 12' 2X6 and lock the bike to that with short chains, both wheels. Paint it black or grey so the condo people won't notice it.
-etc....

None of the above are as good as a pole or proper anchor but they will be close.
 
Bandit Bill said:
You are complaining that a security measure is out of your control, and that you will be penalized if you cannot utilize it. Tough. It is your choice to live in a Condo, and own a theft desireable motorcycle. It is not the choice of those in the pool, who are subsidizing your inability to adapt and compromise. Sell the bike, and get something less theft worthy, or move.

As Cruisngrrl already said, standalone housing already pays appropriately higher house/occupant insurance - in any case, the appropriately stored and secured motorcycles in my garage is not covered by it.
Click to expand...

I think you need to re-read what I wrote. I'm not complaining that I can't chain up my bike. I'm saying STOP TELLING ME TO CHAIN IT UP as it is impossible for me to do so. There's a difference. Given that you don't know me, where I live, or what I ride, I would say your statements about me having an inability to adapt, compromise, get a less desirable bike, or move, are based on some outrageous assumption you are making.

In my case, I have a non-desirable bike already and the security measures in my condo far exceed that of other condos in the GTA, of frankly, houses.
 
Last edited:
Qualdoth said:
I think you need to re-read what I wrote. I'm not complaining that I can't chain up my bike. I'm saying STOP TELLING ME TO CHAIN IT UP as it is impossible for me to do so. There's a difference.
Click to expand...

You are complaining/pushing back at the wrong people then. Talk to your condo-board.

If you can't - that is again your problem, not ours. I'll keep the chain-it up mantra going as long as it takes. Personally i don't care if you chain it up or not, or leave a 'pick-me thieves' sign on it, for all that it matters - I do care that on top of all the insurance burdens that i have to financially carry, that i'm subsidizing people who leave their insured vehicles vulnerable and virtually free for the taking.

Whatever the condo owners excuse is.. it's not a good enough excuse in my books. There are choices and alternatives that can be made and utlized.
 
I think you have experienced some accident there because you comments about the guards are
very offensive. :)
I mean, if you have any complain about it, it can be tolerated but you should your problem first.
regards
 
Dillon said:
I think you have experienced some accident there because you comments about the guards are
very offensive. :)
I mean, if you have any complain about it, it can be tolerated but you should your problem first.
regards
Click to expand...

41779_2204393609_3632_n.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom