There's no such thing as a free lunch. Such things are paid for in other ways, such as higher premiums (e.g.) elsewhere. It's crafty marketing, nothing more.
|
|
|
State Farm renewal raises my Super Sport rate 275% on BMW
- Thread starter cf1340
- Start date
There's no such thing as a free lunch. Such things are paid for in other ways, such as higher premiums (e.g.) elsewhere. It's crafty marketing, nothing more.
samurai
Well-known member
unsuccessful companies also get bought out either for their customer base or patents or for other strategic reasons that will help the buyer.
Uh huh
superseven
Well-known member
While I agree to those stating that SS bikes are high risk, I feel this excuse is used all to often as justification for high rates. What about the rates non SS riders pay... I feel that I should not have to personally pay over 2500 a year to insure all of the vehicles I own. I am one driver and cannot drive a snowmobile, car and motorcycle at the same time. When are we going to get things right and start insuring the individual instead of their vehicles. I am the person operating the various vehicles therefore risk should be based on me rather than my choice of vehicle...
Motorcycles pose greater insurance risk even with non-SS bikes. You are far more likely to be killed or seriously injured on even a scooter than you are in any car, and with the insurance company being on the hook for your medical, rehab, and loss of income costs that means greater insurance risk which in turn leads to higher rates even for a short riding year.
License plates on each of multiple vehicles means unrestricted potential for multiple vehicles to be on the road at the same time, which in turn leads to multiplied insurance risk.
superseven
Well-known member
Sure all of this can be handled with various rules and regulations no different than today. First if people are insured they can be quoted against their highest risk vehicle. Second if someone else has access to the vehicle they to should be licensed and insured themselves. I feel we have started to just accept the system as it is, the system however is not the best and furthermore is a deterrent for certain economic and environmental benefits.
As a example which I am sure someone will poke a hole in is;
Why do people drive massive pickup trucks daily that they own to tow a weekend boat instead of a small econobox? The cost to insure the truck to sit prevents them from buying the second vehicle.
I feel we can justify whatever we want, but the insurance companies profits speak for themselves. I don't want them to loose money, but they don't need to be huge margins either.
Just saying I do not agree with the system in place and do not feel I get a acceptable amount of value from the service provided. However the law says I need it so I do it...
Last edited:
If someone else has access to a vehicle, as in lives in the same house as the insured, the premiums already take into account that driver's individual driving and accident record.
If it is someone else, or several someone elses who do not live in the same household, how do you get coverage for them? Does that mean you need to arrange coverage for a person who uses the car even just once?
Do you instead require an individual to purchase their own insurance even if they don't own a vehicle, just in case they should need to borrow a vehicle belonging to another person, and if so, how could that person do so if he or she doesn't know what type of vehicle they might borrow at some point in the future?
Even with all that, under current common law the vehicle owner and by proxy the insurance provider is responsible for any shortfall involving a civil suit award arising out of the use of his or her vehicle regardless of who is driving it, whether or not the non-owner driver is insured.
State Farm's motor vehicle insurance premium revenue from at least 2011 to 2014 fell short of administrative and claims payout expenses by a fair bit. Where they did make profits on premiums was in the unregulated life and home insurance markets, and on investment returns on premiums they received and held but had not yet paid out.
Last edited:
darek_dadr
Active member
I am currently with State farm and I called TD, Allstate, Intact and none of them want to insure me for a reasonable amount of money. I'm 27, M2 for 3 years, not tickets/accidents, Triumph 675. Who do you recommend?
Iceman
Well-known member
Try Paul South, he's on this forum, listed in the insurance section, seems to have good results for some people.
superseven
Well-known member
I will have to agree to disagree. Generally I feel insurance is carried because we are legally obligated to carry it. It is not a product that you can use but rather have to try to avoid using it or it will become unreasonably expensive. To me any product or service I pay for to not use is difficult to defend and get behind.
Good conversation however thanks for the additional insight.
We both have spotless records. When I called around for bike insurance quotes (to about 6 or 8 places, including all the big boys) I got each and every company to quote me for insuring our vehicles as well. Closest was a near match with SF (but still about a few dollars a month more expensive and I'd have to move EVERYTHING including home insurance, a lot of hassle in the end) and others were not even remotely close. Most didn't even have the option of the crashproof policy deal, including SF.
So again, I respectfully disagree...
Keep it in perspective that you're paying a rather token amount every month (in the grand scheme of things) for insurance that will cover at *least* a million dollars worth of cost (and the wise carry 2 million in coverage for not a lot more) in case you screw up. They'll also spend potentially tens of thousands of dollars repairing your vehicle if you screw up. They'll shield you in many situations that might otherwise result in you being sued into oblivion, losing every single thing you own, and spending the rest of your life under a bridge somewhere.
They're carrying a lot of risk doing so, obviously, so I don't think that it's unreasonable if you prove yourself to be an extremely risky person to insure (increasing the odds they'll have to pay out a Million or 2 dollars some day on your behalf) that they'll charge you more for it.
Even if you drive for, say...60 years - you get your licence at 16 and stop driving at 71 for some reason. You pay, on average over that driving "career" $125/month to insure your car. Yes, you'll pay more than that when you're 16 and less as you age, and perhaps it'll go up and down over the years based on tickets and accidents, but again....lets say that's an average..and a not unreasonable one for someone with a moderately new mid-upper range car.
Using this example, after 60 years of driving you'll have paid $90,000 to your insurance company...a company that will, in the case you screw up really bad some day, cover you for 1 or 2 million dollars, not to mention fender benders and potential write-offs mixed in there.
So yeah, that changes the perspective of some people.
joey12jet1
Well-known member
If only we were trained by this guy, we wouldnt have insurance increase.
Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk
Last edited:
joey12jet1
Well-known member
Deleted
darek_dadr
Active member
Tried him as well - no luck
TorontoBoy
Well-known member
Here's an excellent reason to sell your motor vehicle insurance line of business. When motor vehicle insurance line requires a subsidy from other lines, you know this is not sustainable. They'd rather put money into a business that makes them money, no surprise.
samurai
Well-known member
What quotes are you getting for which bike?
Iceman
Well-known member
He's 27, m2 for 3 years, clean record, triumph 675. Already tried Allstate, TD, Intact.
|
|
|
|
|