I help set rates for a Major Canadian Insurance Company! Some thoughts . . .

Well in your case your clients would pay for it...:laughing8:

But seriously, why can't the PLPD part be prorated over the number of bikes? Is not the PLPD only an issue when the vehicle is being operated an insured operator?

Unless there was a way for the insurer to protect themselves from the following situations, no big discounts can be offered for someone who owns multiple vehicles:

a.) Misrepresentation causing the vehicle's risk to exceed its premium

b.) Someone accidentally or intentionally using the bike when they aren't supposed to, getting into an accident, and then being awarded the claim in court because they hadn't signed a waiver.
 
Last edited:
but let's move on to the accident benefits part....please explain to me why it cannot also be prorated?

Remember, these are not primary use vehicles, not for commuting or for work, simply for pleasure use.

AB rates are different based on the driver and the vehicle combination. The bike is licensed year round. You don't have a sticker for friday evening between 6-9 pm only. The bike is licensed fully and it needs to be insured as such. There is no way to know for sure when you'll be using what. Just like my example of owning two houses.

As you've already pointed out, if it's simply for pleasure use, there are costs associated with having certain luxuries. One has to way them and determine whether it is a feasible financial decision. I would love to take off to Australia, but it's pricey and I can't do it right now... so I don't. Period.
 
Riddle me this insurance guys..... how come this product exists for cars but not bikes?

http://www.lant-ins.ca/

That's antique car insurance . . . those are not Private Passenger Vehicles for everyday use. If someone is insuring multiple valuable classic cars in their collection, chances are pretty good that they aren't trying to hide an operator. The same cannot be said for insurance on a Ford Taurus or a Yamaha R6.
 
That's antique car insurance . . . those are not Private Passenger Vehicles for everyday use. If someone is insuring multiple valuable classic cars in their collection, chances are pretty good that they aren't trying to hide an operator. The same cannot be said for insurance on a Ford Taurus or a Yamaha R6.


:banghead:
 
That's antique car insurance . . . those are not Private Passenger Vehicles for everyday use. If someone is insuring multiple valuable classic cars in their collection, chances are pretty good that they aren't trying to hide an operator. The same cannot be said for insurance on a Ford Taurus or a Yamaha R6.

Why is it that insurance people are always claiming that people are "hiding an operator" of a motorcycle when they always ask who in the household is licensed to ride a motorcycle. I have always been the only person with a motorcycle license in my household and am quite happy with the stipulation that no-one else ever rides my motorcycles, yet on the multiple motorcycles which I insure there have always assessed the full accident benefit premiums - most of the stated benefits of which I could never make any claim for because of my age, employment status and existing employment benefits.

AFJ
 
Why is it that insurance people are always claiming that people are "hiding an operator" of a motorcycle when they always ask who in the household is licensed to ride a motorcycle. I have always been the only person with a motorcycle license in my household and am quite happy with the stipulation that no-one else ever rides my motorcycles, yet on the multiple motorcycles which I insure there have always assessed the full accident benefit premiums - most of the stated benefits of which I could never make any claim for because of my age, employment status and existing employment benefits.

AFJ

We believe that people are hiding operators because the DO. If you have more vehicles than operators, there is an increased chance that there is someone driving the other vehicle that you aren't telling us about. If they need to make a claim, then you will just saying that they were borrowing it for the day (even though they might use it 100% of the time).

Also, the Accident Benefits on your Auto Policy must pay out before your Employment Benefits do when you are in an auto collision.
 
This is a question i need explained to me by VifferFun.
I just received my renewal from StaeFarm for my 2005 Suzuki SV650S. I am 40, no tickets, not at fault accidents, nothing. I have my house,house insurance,life insurance and investments with them and have been with them for 20+ years.
I also have 2 cars although one is only on fire and theft right now and I am on a plan A, my house is in their best rated territory to live in.
Yet i have a rate jump from $798 to $1104 because they have changed the rate classification on 650 bikes and lumping them in with 750's and only a $150-$200 raise to a 1000cc bike.
Now i understand that you have somehting to do with helping insurance set their rates and i would like to hear what excuse there could be for saying a 650 is the same as a 750 and only $200 to go up to a 1000cc bike. That makes no common sense at all and for the money i would be better off buying a 1000cc bike even though i know its out of my league but if i am going to pay jumped up insurance rates from 650 to 1000 why would'nt I?

I await your response to this quesitons. Thanks for your time.

Hey Irocian,

First off, I don't work for State Farm. All of their actuarial work is done south of the border. I do work for one of State Farm's competitors. I personally think that State Farm is under priced on all of its Sport Bikes, but over priced on all of its cruiser bikes, but that has been discussed in another thread.

An insurance company will analyze it's loss data every time it does a rate review (which is typically once a year for motorcycles). At a very high level, here is what happens:


BASIC OVERVIEW OF HOW RATING DIFFERENTIALS ARE DETERMINED

STEP 1.)

We extract our loss data which has a number of indicators on the policy for each variable that we rate by (such as Age, Class, Displacement, Territory, etc.). Using Actuarial techniques, we estimate the ultimate amount that we will be paying out for claims.

STEP 2.)

For each indicator, we band the data. Hypothetically speaking, the displacement bandings might look something like the following:

0-50cc
50-150cc
150-250cc
250-600cc
600-750cc
750-1000cc
1000+cc
etc.

STEP 3.)

We determine the Loss Cost (i.e. dollar amount of claim per policy) for each banding. Suppose for the bandings described in step (2), it goes:

0-50cc ______$100
50-150cc ____$200
150-250cc ___$250
250-600cc____$300
600-750 _____$500
750-1000cc___$1000

STEP 4.)

We choose a "base" such as 250-500cc, and then determine the relativities of the other bands by dividing. In this example, 250-500cc would have a relativity of 1.000, where as 500-750cc would be 250/200 = 1.25. These relativities will be one of many that are multiplied to the base rate of your territory to calculate your premium. Some relativities will be greater than 1.000 (thereby increasing your premium), where as others will be less than 1.000 (thereby reducing your premium).


BASIC EXAMPLE OF A FICTIONAL TPL PREMIUM CALCULATION

Base Premium: $300
50yo: 0.800
Male: 1.100
Sport Class: 1.75
650CC: 1.500
Multi-Product: 0.900
Multi-Vehicle: 0.900
6 Years Accident Free: 0.600
2 Convictions: 1.100

TPL PREMIUM
= ($300)(0.800)(1.100)(1.750)(1.500)(0.900)(0.900)(0.600)(1.100)
= $370.48


Hopefully this should help make sense of the situation for you. Your problem is that State Farm decided to change their displacement banding, which they would only do if the claims history for the 650cc bikes are similar to the 750cc bikes. If they were drastically different, then they would each be in their own bands.

Does this help answer your question?

Cheers!
 
Last edited:
Thanks sorry i didn't mean to infer you did work for them but that you helped with other insurance companies.

I get it by your explaination but wonder why it wasn't sent out to customers as i would have bought a bigger bike for the same insurance cost.
 
Thanks sorry i didn't mean to infer you did work for them but that you helped with other insurance companies.

I get it by your explaination but wonder why it wasn't sent out to customers as i would have bought a bigger bike for the same insurance cost.

Sorry, I'm not sure what you are referring to. What did you want State Farm to send out to their customers?

Also, are you telling me State Farm is banding a 1000cc bike is in the same group as your 650cc bike? I would find that hard to believe.
 
Ok i have another Q ... Why wont statefarm insure me on an M1 when i have a clean record for 2.5 years( time insured with starefarm on my car) still they require a crappy 5 year driving record to insure a motorcycle with them. I have house and car isnurance with them. No claims am 25 an they wont insure me. How can i avail the multiline discount ?? Now only way wud be to move everything to a differant company an pay a penalty. WHAT CRAP !!!
 
Ok i have another Q ... Why wont statefarm insure me on an M1 when i have a clean record for 2.5 years( time insured with starefarm on my car) still they require a crappy 5 year driving record to insure a motorcycle with them. I have house and car isnurance with them. No claims am 25 an they wont insure me. How can i avail the multiline discount ?? Now only way wud be to move everything to a differant company an pay a penalty. WHAT CRAP !!!

They probably won't insure the bike for exactly the reasons that you listed: You only have 2.5 years experience in a car (which is really not much at all) and you only have your M1 (meaning you simply passed a written test that your average 12yo could pass). It seems logical to me. Thy want to see a proven 5-year history before they will write you a more risky policy.

With that being said, I don't work for State Farm so I can't really discuss their specific policies or the reasons why they are in place.
 
Hey Guys,

I just thought it was interesting how people are bashing the insurance companies for jacking up rates, and I can certainly sympathize since I am a rider too!

PREMIUMS = CLAIMS (~65%) + EXPENSES (~28%) + PROFIT (~7%)

It is a common misconception that Insurance Companies reap HUGE profits, which is simply not true. The overall profit of a company is usually within the range of -10% to 10%, depending on the performance of the specific insurance company's book of business. In fact, the government completely oversees the ratemaking process such that we are not even allowed to increase rates unless we ask for permission with supporting statistics.

Cheers!

Sound like typical saleman in a dealership. Add just 50 buck (to 15 hundreds) and get another million coverage. **** them up!

Just a couple of observation: Ontario companies are really unique, they don't care about any previous driving expiring from other countries. Ok, let's assume that something special is in Ontario air.

But what about licensing and how it's organised in Ontario (multi-level system, courses, instructors and etc.) - and after that charing up to 25 hundreds bucks just because I'm starting to drive in Ontario? 31 years old, 10 years of driving experience: forget, buddy. You are in Ontario now. What's the hell, not too much do you want at once?

And please don't tell how much you pay for claims. The reason is simple: companies rise premium for any record. So basically, drives are paying them off all risks insurance companies might have.

And there is a real strange point that american pay less because of minimum coverage much lower. So, according to your argument, there are thousand americans on road who even can pay for legal expenses in case of accident. Well, they are not so smart of course, as Canadians but still I doubt that they are on road without basic coverage.

So, just tell the truth. The industry are lazy and greedy, you are lucky to have laws to support your unbelievable rates (who cares what cases it) and government who can only restrict bans (ha-ha, 100km/h on the highways).

Way to go!
 
Sound like typical saleman in a dealership. Add just 50 buck (to 15 hundreds) and get another million coverage. **** them up!

Just a couple of observation: Ontario companies are really unique, they don't care about any previous driving expiring from other countries. Ok, let's assume that something special is in Ontario air.

But what about licensing and how it's organised in Ontario (multi-level system, courses, instructors and etc.) - and after that charing up to 25 hundreds bucks just because I'm starting to drive in Ontario? 31 years old, 10 years of driving experience: forget, buddy. You are in Ontario now. What's the hell, not too much do you want at once?

And please don't tell how much you pay for claims. The reason is simple: companies rise premium for any record. So basically, drives are paying them off all risks insurance companies might have.

And there is a real strange point that american pay less because of minimum coverage much lower. So, according to your argument, there are thousand americans on road who even can pay for legal expenses in case of accident. Well, they are not so smart of course, as Canadians but still I doubt that they are on road without basic coverage.

So, just tell the truth. The industry are lazy and greedy, you are lucky to have laws to support your unbelievable rates (who cares what cases it) and government who can only restrict bans (ha-ha, 100km/h on the highways).

Way to go!

The situation of drivers with experience outside of Ontario is an underwriting issue, which is outside of my area of expertise. If I had to guess, most insurers will not give you full credit for out-of-country experience because they have no way of verifying it. That is just a guess though.

I tried reading the rest of your post, but there are missing words and grammar making it illegible. Please edit your post and I will respond to your other comments.
 
The situation of drivers with experience outside of Ontario is an underwriting issue, which is outside of my area of expertise. If I had to guess, most insurers will not give you full credit for out-of-country experience because they have no way of verifying it. That is just a guess though.

I would venture a guess, that politics plays a bit of a role in this as well. The application form is written and legislated by the province. It asks for the date first licensed in Canada or the US. I find it strange that a person from Russia gets 0 years credit while an individual from California gets full credit.

If it's February and I have to get into a vehicle with one of those two drivers, I'm going with the Russian
 
Back
Top Bottom