State Farm robbing me??

And you are getting hosed my friend try TD i was paying under $250 with them for my ninja 250 when I had it and the SV is around 500 per year my 1198 is the only one I am paying over a grand for per year.

How many bikes, cars, a house with TD? I called them, no different.

Sent from my X10i using Tapatalk
 
I checked TD too as SF increased my rates on both of my cars and a bike, altogether some 80$ monthly more. I used the TD online quote and was shocked when i saw 4500$ a year just for the bike. I'm 29, m2 for a year and 1000cc bike. Comparing to TD in my case SF rocks at least for the bike: 125$ monthly.
 
What matters actually the most is where you live (a guy in Waterloo will always pay much less than a guy in Toronto). If you live in a zone which is rated harshly it provides sort of surcharge on top of everything.

TD is not for everyone, but up to 600cc and the older you get the better rate you will get with TD. All else being equal of course.
 
guns dont kill people, people kill people; i believe that the person should be insurd not the vehicle and yes im the only motorcycle licensed rider in the house, i do agree that you can only ride one bike at time.

In Ontario you insure the car based on the operator who uses it the most. Although insuring the operator sounds nice at first, it would mean that families with two operators and a single car would see a double in their premium, even though only one person can operate the vehicle at a given time. Insuring the operator benefits the wealthy (more vehicles than operators) at the expense of the not-so-wealthy (as many or less vehicles than operators).
 
You're not quite right Viffer. You insure the car based on who the insurance company thinks is going to drive it the most. I had three vehicles and the kids did not drive any of them much at all; less than I drove each of them. The insurance company made me declare one of the kids as the primary driver on one of them, even though they weren't.
 
You're not quite right Viffer. You insure the car based on who the insurance company thinks is going to drive it the most. I had three vehicles and the kids did not drive any of them much at all; less than I drove each of them. The insurance company made me declare one of the kids as the primary driver on one of them, even though they weren't.

This is the insurance company protecting itself from fraud; otherwise, everyone with kids would just happen to have an extra car around that their kids "never drive". If your kids never use the vehicle, then you could have them sign an OPCF28a exclusion endorsement which prohibits them from driving the vehicle, and then the insurer wouldn't force one of them to be the primary operator.
 
This is the insurance company protecting itself from fraud; otherwise, everyone with kids would just happen to have an extra car around that their kids "never drive". If your kids never use the vehicle, then you could have them sign an OPCF28a exclusion endorsement which prohibits them from driving the vehicle, and then the insurer wouldn't force one of them to be the primary operator.

So you could exclude them from the 3rd vehicle and still designate your wife and yourself on the other 2? Who becomes the primary driver of #3? Doesn't make sense. That is just as easy to exploit.
 
Hey Viffer. I agree, but the issue for me was the kids did drive the car occasionally, but definitely less than me, so the ratings should have been for me, not for a g2 male. They were away at University in Waterloo, but I wanted them to be able to drive the car when they came home, so I got burned for all the extra $$ as if they lived with me and commuted.
 
So you could exclude them from the 3rd vehicle and still designate your wife and yourself on the other 2? Who becomes the primary driver of #3? Doesn't make sense. That is just as easy to exploit.

No -- the children would have to be excluded from all vehicles.
 
Hey Viffer. I agree, but the issue for me was the kids did drive the car occasionally, but definitely less than me, so the ratings should have been for me, not for a g2 male. They were away at University in Waterloo, but I wanted them to be able to drive the car when they came home, so I got burned for all the extra $$ as if they lived with me and commuted.

If the children don't live in the same household, then I don't see why they would have to be listed on your policy at all unless they are using the vehicle regularly. Perhaps the underwriting rules are different for students because they are expected to be home 4MO or more of the year.
 
viffer, please explain how your postal code affects your rates, the m6 corridor ?

Your postal code affects your rate for Auto more than Motorcycle . . . for many/most motorcycle insurance plans, the postal code doesn't affect your rate at all.

Each company will have an Auto Rating Variable know as "Territory", which is essentially a collection of postal codes with a similar claims experience. Often, postal codes are grouped based on the first three digits known as the FSA (for example: M1R, N1H, etc.). If you can think of Ontario as a giant 50-piece jigsaw puzzle, each puzzle piece is a territory and each puzzle piece gets a different rate. In general, the GTA puzzle pieces are charged a much higher premium than, say, a London or Waterloo puzzle piece (since the claims experience in the GTA is much worse).
 
Back
Top Bottom