Insurance co says to rider... Are you OK? Here's a cheque for $7500, just sign here to say you're not hurt and well take care of the bike.
Case closed. Ins co resells the bike for $3K + $500 deductible, eliminates future AB loss once waiver is signed for a payout of $4K less the OPs $2K premium for a net loss of 2K. Ins co then ups OP insurance by $1.5K a year for the next 5 years knowing nobody will take on a new rider with an at fault claim. Who wins?
You forgot that whoever buys the wrecked bike still has to go out and buy insurance, they just created a new customer and the rates on that model just went up.
@IbbadMurtaza just wondering why didn't you get your bike insured with The Personal? You would have got a 30 pct discount since you work for the bank of commerce. Ask me how I know.
To be honest brother, I was so intrigued by the prices of Co-operators, that I didn’t feel it was necessary to go with Personal.
Let me guess, you’re an employee?
I will call them and see what’s up.
Yes sir, this is my bike.!
I am so sorry I went ghost, I didn’t know that fellow riders out there would still be contributing to the post.!
I hope this really helps future riders man.
Yes sir, this is my bike.!
I am so sorry I went ghost, I didn’t know that fellow riders out there would still be contributing to the post.!
I hope this really helps future riders man.
I went to see the bike, my guess is you could have fixed it for the deductible. I'd have bought it if it went for 42K -- there was a guy there with a hardon for an M50, he bid her up to what you would pay for one on Kij.
I just double checked the VIN, it’s my bike, or was.!
Pretty disappointed at myself still, don’t know why this had to happen with me. I’ve been on Kijiji for almost a month now looking for a motorcycle, can’t find something that I would like.
I have a $6,000-7,000 budget. I’m trying to find a M50 or C50, with low kms and something fairly new. I wouldn’t mind a Honda Shadow 750.
Well nobody needs to say anything but hopefully you understand that is how the insurance system actually works! Insurance rates are based on pay-outs, the more claims that are made against motorcycles the higher everybody's motorcycle insurance goes up to cover their costs. There is no up side for motorcycle riders when a motorcycle accident happens to another riders motorcycle or your own, it's bad news for all of us.
The don't worry about it part is because that is what insurance is for and so you should not feel badly about making a claim when you need to. It has also provided a bunch of employment and sales in the motorcycle industry along with generation of additional tax dollars.
Best luck finding a new ride, ride lots once you get one which is hopefully soon, have tons of fun and be safe as possible, because that is what riding motorcycles is all about
Yes I am and as long as you don't touch Super sport the discount hopefully will put you within reach of buying a new motorcycle and keeping it semi reasonable.
Then maybe you can explain to us why a (supersport) motorcycle, easily identified by its vastly superior suspension brakes tires and overall handling makes a rider with a longtime safe riding history a high risk
Then maybe you can explain to us why a (supersport) motorcycle, easily identified by its vastly superior suspension brakes tires and overall handling makes a rider with a longtime safe riding history a high risk
That implies somebody else's history is a risk to me, and if the response is claim statistics then where do the statistics come from on a brand new bike make and model that has not been in production long enough to even have a vehicle history. I bought a first year model MV Agusta that did not even exist before insurance companies had already determined it was a "restricted" vehicle. (restricted was their term not mine)
... unless the risk is with motorcycles in general in which case where do they get off implying the supersport designation is the problem and everything else is good to go. Add I'm not talking about collision coverage here either, I'm talking about minimum coverage (all of my insurance claims to date have been against the other driver being 100% at fault.)
That implies somebody else's history is a risk to me, and if the response is claim statistics then where do the statistics come from on a brand new bike make and model that has not been in production long enough to even have a vehicle history. I bought a first year model MV Agusta that did not even exist before insurance companies had already determined it was a "restricted" vehicle. (restricted was their term not mine)
... unless the risk is with motorcycles in general in which case where do they get off implying the supersport designation is the problem and everything else is good to go. Add I'm not talking about collision coverage here either, I'm talking about minimum coverage (all of my insurance claims to date have been against the other driver being 100% at fault.)
Was kind of hoping toolgt4u could shed some logic on it, but I suspect I'm flogging a dead cash cow, they just don't seem to want great motorcycles to exist and somehow having a fairing, phenomenal brakes and awesome grippy tires makes me a tremendous danger to myself. If I rode a gutless, under dampened, heavier piece of junk rolling on cheap tires and drum brakes, they seem to think that makes me less of an insurance risk.
Got news for you insurance guys; the only thing a heavier motorcycle does for you is achieve greater penetration on impact.
Then maybe you can explain to us why a (supersport) motorcycle, easily identified by its vastly superior suspension brakes tires and overall handling makes a rider with a longtime safe riding history a high risk
That implies somebody else's history is a risk to me, and if the response is claim statistics then where do the statistics come from on a brand new bike make and model that has not been in production long enough to even have a vehicle history. I bought a first year model MV Agusta that did not even exist before insurance companies had already determined it was a "restricted" vehicle. (restricted was their term not mine)
... unless the risk is with motorcycles in general in which case where do they get off implying the supersport designation is the problem and everything else is good to go. Add I'm not talking about collision coverage here either, I'm talking about minimum coverage (all of my insurance claims to date have been against the other driver being 100% at fault.)
Think is they don't know, don't care. They study ages and crash data for cars then loosely apply that to motorcycles. In jurisdictions where they have to publicly disclose crash data, there is little price differences between any class of bike.
It's a well organized business with an exceptionally strong lobby. Takes a lot of political capital and will to upset an industry so well entrenched -- not going to happen quickly.
For fun, I'm gonna list the counts and types of bikes that are sent to Impact as crashed bikes in Ontario. These are the wrecked bikes, I did not include Kars for Kids donations, flood and fire writeoffs.
Here's the list 5/21/2017 for Impact Ontario locations
nope, that didn't help and it barely makes sense, a list of crashed bikes has little bearing on my liability and personal injury coverage risk,
You completely missed the part "Add I'm not talking about collision coverage here either, I'm talking about minimum coverage" if I crash my bike tomorrow, I get zero help to fix or replace it from my insurance coverage, I would need to get hit by somebody else and have them 100% at fault.
... Unless I get my wife to accidentally run me over with my own truck, that might work.
Trust me I do get it. My point is there is no correlation to risk and premiums with bikes and riders. Premiums are based on a business model, not a risk model -- as long prices yeild a business wide payout < premiums things are OK. Whether you have collision or not is irrelevant to Ins co business model. They price collision low because they know that in an accident, payers often want a return -- Ins cos also know quickly paying out a few thousand for a bike makes insured less likely to go down the road of frivolous and or AB claims.
To really see there is no correlation, look at the list of writeoffs as a starting point -- it's pretty much the same mix every week. Now, put the demographic to the bike. Now plunk in what you know about the cost to insure bikes by age and category. Make sense -- nope. The married middle aged heavy cruiser rider pays the lowest premium yet has the biggest number of bikes on the weekly destroyed list. He also pays for 2 cars (and is in a low payout category), house and life ins so Ins co.s don't want to piss him off with crazy bike ins rates. The demographic that likes SS bikes have good payouts on cars (which they study) and doesn't yet tale much in the way of life and home ins -- better to just scare him away with price -- if he still bites, laugh and grab the money.
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.
