Everyone should read this..

[invictus43]

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/704884

[VifferFun]

That's an interesting article that explains a lot of the reasons for increased rates. Thanks for posting it

I don't work in Claims, but I can only imagine that it must be a daily struggle to try and separate those who really need treatment from those who are only milking the system on the advice of their legal council. In the end, we all pay for it.

The article alludes to a cap on minor injuries being proposed to the government; if those goes through, then we can see some premium decreases in the near future.

[FiReSTaRT]

One issue that I have with this article is that instead of focusing on minimising abuse of the system, the author is suggesting reducing coverage.

[A-Dogg]

That's an interesting article that explains a lot of the reasons for increased rates. Thanks for posting it

I don't work in Claims, but I can only imagine that it must be a daily struggle to try and separate those who really need treatment from those who are only milking the system on the advice of their legal council. In the end, we all pay for it.

The article alludes to a cap on minor injuries being proposed to the government; if those goes through, then we can see some premium decreases in the near future.

Who are we kidding here? Premiums do one thing and this is to go up. There have been enough laws in place and the safer roads campaign. Did you see your premiums go down?

The main reason for the cap is for insurance companies to make more profit. It's easier for them to forecast their profits due to the caps.

[A-Dogg]

Why is it that if I own 2 or 3 motorcycles that I need to insure each one? I can only ride one at a time. Can someone please explain that to me.

[Jlin]

Why is it that if I own 2 or 3 motorcycles that I need to insure each one? I can only ride one at a time. Can someone please explain that to me.

Because you can let your friend or family ride the others.

[VifferFun]

Why is it that if I own 2 or 3 motorcycles that I need to insure each one? I can only ride one at a time. Can someone please explain that to me.

I've explained that many times . . . please search.

[VifferFun]

Who are we kidding here? Premiums do one thing and this is to go up. There have been enough laws in place and the safer roads campaign. Did you see your premiums go down?

The main reason for the cap is for insurance companies to make more profit. It's easier for them to forecast their profits due to the caps.

Laws for what? Laws that reduce the abuse of insurance? I agree that a 20-year jail sentence for insurance fraud would definitely cause your rates to decrease. And I really don't think that any "safer road campaign" has any effect on the average driver.

Premiums go up with inflation. Inflation for accident injury claims exceeds the regular rate inflation by a large margin (approximately 8% per year). If claim costs rise, so do your premiums. If claim costs fall, so do your premiums. If caps are put into effect, I can guarantee you that MANDATORY rate decreases will be mandated by FSCO. This is fine with the insurance industry, because we have the same goal in mind.

[BusaBob]

Talk about jaw dropping excessive:

She received $4,096 of income replacement, and sought $9,600 to pay for housekeeping and for help dressing, washing her hair and cutting her toenails. The chiropractor she saw proposed to spend nearly 117 hours and bill $22,158 to assess her injuries, home and workplace. Along with a psychologist, the chiropractor proposed $26,000 worth of treatments and assistive devices.
The insurer did approve $10,164 for assessments, but another $3,454 slipped from its grasp because employees failed to object within a three-day time limit.

...but sadly, not shocking.

it's a shame crack-pots like this don't get their license revoked and thrown in the slammer.

It seems ontario takes a soft stance on fraud.

[2smokewilleh]

I'm going to make this VERY Clear:

Ontario Auto Insurance Companies are NOT MAKING MASSIVE PROFITS. They are not making any profit at all on their Accident Benefits (Manditory) coverage.

If you really believe that the insurers are making huge profits, you are COMPLETELY and UTTERLY mis-informed. The insurance companies are actually losing massive amounts of dollars because of the flaws in our no-fault Accident Benefit scheme. The Insurance company I work for has been paying out $1.70 in claims per every $1.00 received in premiums, and we were only able to raise our premiums slighly after the government let us, but we are still losing money on the Auto product.

Now, don' get me wrong, the insurance companies are making profits elsewhere, in other provinces and in other states, and in other products (Home/Life/Commercial/Financial etc) but not in Ontario because our rules are allowing excessive abuse of the system, and limiting the insurance company because they need approval to raise rates. It has become not profitable for them with the current laws/regulations, and we are desperate for a change in the legislation before a number of auto insurers start pulling out of insuring in Ontario, or force a massive rise in premiums so that they could actually make some profit.

If you don't believe me, look at other provinces that have private insurance: Alberta has minimal limits, you get hurt in an accident, you get like $5,000 in medical coverage over 4 months, and guess what, insurance is super cheap! Ontario, you get $100,000 over 10 years. Plus income replacement, housekeeping, attendant care, caregiver, non earner benefits, etc etc etc... All manditory coverages that Ontario insurers have to provide because they are regulated by the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule of Ontario (Provincial Law, not a private policy offered by insurance company). And guess what? It costs way more to get insurance here! No surprise there??

[2smokewilleh]

Laws for what? Laws that reduce the abuse of insurance? I agree that a 20-year jail sentence for insurance fraud would definitely cause your rates to decrease. And I really don't think that any "safer road campaign" has any effect on the average driver.

Premiums go up with inflation. Inflation for accident injury claims exceeds the regular rate inflation by a large margin (approximately 8% per year). If claim costs rise, so do your premiums. If claim costs fall, so do your premiums. If caps are put into effect, I can guarantee you that MANDATORY rate decreases will be mandated by FSCO. This is fine with the insurance industry, because we have the same goal in mind.

This doesnt even help, because we are obligated to keep information private under law, even If we do catch fraudsters, we are only able to possibly deny the claim (which they can fight 3x through court at great cost to the insurers), but we can't report it to the police or anywhere else because we are not allowed to disclose information due to the privacy regulations. The only way to get caught for insurance fraud by the police is if the IBC catches it and shares their investigation (rarely happens).

[VifferFun]

I'm going to make this VERY Clear:

Ontario Auto Insurance Companies are NOT MAKING MASSIVE PROFITS. They are not making any profit at all on their Accident Benefits (Manditory) coverage.

If you really believe that the insurers are making huge profits, you are COMPLETELY and UTTERLY mis-informed. The insurance companies are actually losing massive amounts of dollars because of the flaws in our no-fault Accident Benefit scheme. The Insurance company I work for has been paying out $1.70 in claims per every $1.00 received in premiums, and we were only able to raise our premiums slighly after the government let us, but we are still losing money on the Auto product.

Now, don' get me wrong, the insurance companies are making profits elsewhere, in other provinces and in other states, and in other products (Home/Life/Commercial/Financial etc) but not in Ontario because our rules are allowing excessive abuse of the system, and limiting the insurance company because they need approval to raise rates. It has become not profitable for them with the current laws/regulations, and we are desperate for a change in the legislation before a number of auto insurers start pulling out of insuring in Ontario, or force a massive rise in premiums so that they could actually make some profit.

If you don't believe me, look at other provinces that have private insurance: Alberta has minimal limits, you get hurt in an accident, you get like $5,000 in medical coverage over 4 months, and guess what, insurance is super cheap! Ontario, you get $100,000 over 10 years. Plus income replacement, housekeeping, attendant care, caregiver, non earner benefits, etc etc etc... All manditory coverages that Ontario insurers have to provide because they are regulated by the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule of Ontario (Provincial Law, not a private policy offered by insurance company). And guess what? It costs way more to get insurance here! No surprise there??

This is all very true, but people will continue to believe what they want to. People will always think that the greedy insurance companies are simply printing presses for money.

Ontarians are receiving a Mercedes insurance product at the cost of a Buick, but complain that people in other provinces/states pay the price of a Kia. They fail to recognize that the other people are getting a Kia for their money, yet we are getting a Mercedes. People don't look at the insurance product, but simply look at the price.

Now, the big problem in Ontario is that it seems people don't want a Mercedes insurance product, which is completely understandable; however, the Government forces the insurance companies to keep the Mercedes as the cheapest product on the lot. The Government also dictates the price that we are allowed to charge for the Mercedes, which is below its actual cost. There is a disconnect between what people want, and what the Government is forcing them to buy.

The goal is to put limitations on the product so that the insurers are able to sell products below the Mercedes level. If we are able to offer a cheaper product, we can charge less for it. If there are limits on small injuries, then the new industry that basically emerged to service (and exploit) these claims will fizzle out, because their big money will no longer be there.

[mxs]

OK Viffer, nice analogy. Sounds like you were holding off a post like that for a while. Finally got it out, LOL .....

BTW I agree and I guess the only people who will oppose this straightforward logic, are the ones who actually received the Mercedes for Buick's MSRP ..... but that will always be like that. I think majority would rather settle for KIA and pay for KIA and hope they will never need Mercedes.

[VifferFun]

OK Viffer, nice analogy. Sounds like you were holding off a post like that for a while. Finally got it out, LOL .....

It wasn't intended to be a rant, but rather a statement of fact

BTW I agree and I guess the only people who will oppose this straightforward logic, are the ones who actually received the Mercedes for Buick's MSRP ..... but that will always be like that. I think majority would rather settle for KIA and pay for KIA and hope they will never need Mercedes.

Everyone is receiving the Mercedes for the Buick price right now . . . they just won't realize it until they actually need to use it.

Insurance is just like taxes . . . no one wants to pay it, but they want all of the benefits.

I also think that people would be happy with a more affordable Kia, provided that we can put an end to the milking of the insurance industry. Legislative action is needed, and there are already talks with the government in progress.

[2smokewilleh]

That was a great analogy viffer! I just get so frustrated because I deal with the claims like they're talking about in that article, and it just really grinds my gears to see that people would rather sympathise with scammers, cheaters and liars rather than companies that are genuinely focused on helping the legitimate policy holders! I wish that somehow we could change the image of Insurance companies to not look like the 'bad guy' that these paralegals and scammers are convincing people that we are... you'd have no idea how many people are surprised that we are actually willing to pay what is owed on claims without them having to get a lawyer to 'fight the greedy insurer'.

[A-Dogg]

Because you can let your friend or family ride the others.

WRONG!

SF has a disclaimer that no males under 25 or something of the sort can drive your care regularly. It would be fairly easy to sign an agreement that states you are the sole operator and in the event of mishap then coverage will be denied if someone else was riding.

Now that takes care of that. Now tell me again why we need insurance for each bike. Oh right, so they can make more money and hose us more.

[zacm7]

WRONG!

SF has a disclaimer that no males under 25 or something of the sort can drive your care regularly. It would be fairly easy to sign an agreement that states you are the sole operator and in the event of mishap then coverage will be denied if someone else was riding.

Now that takes care of that. Now tell me again why we need insurance for each bike. Oh right, so they can make more money and hose us more.

correct! when i was 17 the insurance company wanted to raise the price of my dads Harley because i got my m2 and they said that i was going to ride it. they sent him out a form and it stated that his rates would stay the same if he signed off that no one but him would be riding it. so i totally agree with you. if you have a vstar, a supermoto, and a zx6r they should just give you a rate for the zx6r and then fire and theft for the other 2, is there really a need for liability on 3 bikes...no.

[Avi Singh]

WRONG!

SF has a disclaimer that no males under 25 or something of the sort can drive your care regularly. It would be fairly easy to sign an agreement that states you are the sole operator and in the event of mishap then coverage will be denied if someone else was riding.

Now that takes care of that. Now tell me again why we need insurance for each bike. Oh right, so they can make more money and hose us more.

There is nothing in the Ontario Automobile Policy that says this. The policy is the same, regardless of the insurance company, it is written and legislated by the government of Ontario.

Even if you sign an OPCF28 driver exclusion, certain accident benefits still apply.

Avi

[DucDic]

hahaha...this is awesome...you know how many more people are going to riding/driving around without insurance...no wonder we have so many hit and runs...i've had 4 hit and runs so far, one on my car, 2 on my GF's (we caught one)...and one on my aunt's car...i f#!cking hate these people...now with the rates going up...yeah...you bet i catch the idiot trying to run, first thing i'm doing is yanking the keys out of the ignition...

[VifferFun]

WRONG!

SF has a disclaimer that no males under 25 or something of the sort can drive your care regularly. It would be fairly easy to sign an agreement that states you are the sole operator and in the event of mishap then coverage will be denied if someone else was riding.

Now that takes care of that. Now tell me again why we need insurance for each bike. Oh right, so they can make more money and hose us more.

The OPCF28a driver exclusion form excludes ONE specific driver in the household from operating a specific vehicle:

http://www.fsco.gov.on.ca/English/PU.../a-03_05-1.pdf

There is no such insurance policy that only covers people aged 25+ (although this is a common misconception). If you sign an OPCF28a stating that you will not drive your father's car, this does not stop your 19yo friend from driving your father's car. Your friend is still covered on your father's car because he did not specifically sign the OPCF28a driver exclusion form. Unless the insurance company has a form that will function as legal proof in court that you were fully aware that you were not covered on the policy (and you did not steal the vehicle or use it in a criminal act), then the insurance policy on the vehicle will cover you. How do you propose that we get an exclusion signature from everyone in the world but yourself?

I have already recognized this as a problem, and there are threads already devoted to this topic. I welcome your suggestions in the other threads.