Insuring 2 bikes silmultaniously | Page 3 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Insuring 2 bikes silmultaniously

Provinces with a more conservative social view are cheaper. Like Alberta "most" (I repeat most) things are cheaper

Add to that the wages there are significantly better. Yes some things are still expensive but it's all relative. I made considerably more there yearly in 2002 than I do now that I'm back here. Insurance quote for a busa there was just shy of 1000. Came back here within the same month of getting the quote and it was almost 5 grand. Cost of living stayed the same yet insurance went up and wages went down.
 
I am currently insuring two bikes with TD. You do get a discount when you insure more then one bike.

I think i'm getting about $200 or so off each bike on insurance.
 
I am currently insuring two bikes with TD. You do get a discount when you insure more then one bike.

I think i'm getting about $200 or so off each bike on insurance.

Most will give up to 15%. Still, with 3 vehicles you're paying 3x normal price minus 15% which isn't nearly as nice as paying 1/3 (since you can only use one at a time) would be.

Now that I sold my WRX my rates dropped from $269/month to $115/month. Yay! Will likely go back up if/when I buy another vehicle for winter, though.
 
We are all sheep. There's no way around it. Ontario Insurance is a highway robbery, and we are too dumb to do anything about it.
There's no point in arguing with brokers, it isn't their fault. The law was written by the politician who took big $ from insurance cartel. Passed by his buddies. They knew exactly what they were doing.
Insurance companies can do anything they want, we have no way of being right, and have no voice in the matter.
Insurance companies are raking in huge profits while spending like crazy (re-furnishing their offices/buildings every year, re-branding, re-printing, blah blah blah) just throwing money out the window, and STILL rake in billions in profit.
This thread is perfect example of how brazen and ridiculous our rates and rules are. In any just society, this type of fraud would never be allowed into practice. But, this is Ontario, and we are sheep. This massive fraud is allowed and regulated by the law. Let that sink in... Politicians that were voted in by you, to work for you, wrote a law that allows for-profit cartel to do anything they want. Not accountable to anyone (beside shareholders who only want more profit) - and on our part - we have to have insurance. It is deplorable state of affairs for this province.
Don't take your frustration out on an innocent broker - get involved with your MPP (Ontario level, not your MP or your mayor - it has nothing to do with them), and if there is ever any protest/petition/movement - be there, or be sheep... /rant
 
Everyone seemed to answer this one but I'll throw my two cents in...

Insurance companies offer very little discounts for insuring two bikes together, but some do. Intact, for example offers a 5% discount, but here's the big problem I come across daily. Companies like Intact have a list of bikes they aren't willing to insure (mostly sport and super-sport) and also limits on who they will insure. Under 25, M1, two or more tickets, you're out of luck.

So basically, if you are the owner of both bikes and both qualify for the insurance company and all drivers qualify, insure them together.
 
We are all sheep. There's no way around it. Ontario Insurance is a highway robbery, and we are too dumb to do anything about it.
There's no point in arguing with brokers, it isn't their fault. The law was written by the politician who took big $ from insurance cartel. Passed by his buddies. They knew exactly what they were doing.
Insurance companies can do anything they want, we have no way of being right, and have no voice in the matter.
Insurance companies are raking in huge profits while spending like crazy (re-furnishing their offices/buildings every year, re-branding, re-printing, blah blah blah) just throwing money out the window, and STILL rake in billions in profit.
This thread is perfect example of how brazen and ridiculous our rates and rules are. In any just society, this type of fraud would never be allowed into practice. But, this is Ontario, and we are sheep. This massive fraud is allowed and regulated by the law. Let that sink in... Politicians that were voted in by you, to work for you, wrote a law that allows for-profit cartel to do anything they want. Not accountable to anyone (beside shareholders who only want more profit) - and on our part - we have to have insurance. It is deplorable state of affairs for this province.
Don't take your frustration out on an innocent broker - get involved with your MPP (Ontario level, not your MP or your mayor - it has nothing to do with them), and if there is ever any protest/petition/movement - be there, or be sheep... /rant​


I pretty much agree with all has been said in this particular thread, it is also frustrating for us brokers to have to deal with insurance increases year after year.
I can assure you guys we're not happy about it, we would like to have the rates remain stable year after year, or even better pay what the Atlantic Provinces pay for the year, approximately 1/2 of what we pay.

There is nothing we or insurance companies can do about it untill "us" the consumer do something about it.

it's very easy to blame the insurance company because they are the ones that are increasing the premium every year.

They estimate there is $40 Billion dollars paid out in fraudulent insurance claims per year, every single year and increasing.
Those claims are anything from Accident benefits claims, claiming more than what really was lost, planned fraudulent claims, etc, etc, etc.

This popular claim is related to this thread, having 2 or more vehicles in the home and not disclosing drivers, when we asked how many drivers in the home, the answear "just me"
6-7 months later there is a claim with a young driver that resided in the house.

Guess who's paying for all of this "we are". We as a consumer are always trying to rip off the insurance company.

I'm sure you all know someone that said they got $10,000 from the insurance company from a fraudulent claim where they should of only got $2000.


My questions to you guys: Who's ripping off who??
 
Last edited:
The "Insurance Fraud is to blame for high rates" line doesn't hold water.
If that was true - why aren't insurance companies doing something about it - other than passing the cost to us? This arrangement works for them (they are reducing coverage AND increasing rates for everyone, while blaming fraudsters).

As stated in this thread, it could be solved in few really simple steps - have a clause in policy that it is only valid while vehicle is operated by First Last name.
If anyone else is driving - they are driving without insurance. - How easy is that?

If parents are taking policies and letting their kids drive - why aren't insurance companies doing something/anything about it? They are aware of the problem, it is very costly problem, but instead of introducing simple option, they would rather continue to pass the cost of it onto us... and still blame someone else... This is the complacency of well established racket... Brazen, arrogant thieves acting the way they do - because they are above the law.

Everyone knows how fraud works - from towing to body shops to medical exams/procedures. There's no great mystery here.
There are prolific surveillance technologies these days - start recording these real fraudsters and throw them behind bars - shake up that entire circus and bring some discipline and accountability into that system. Win /Win situation... but insurance companies are not interested in that, status quo works just fine for them.

Blame for this travesty we call Ontario Insurance Act lies flat on insurance companies and politicians they pay off year after year.
 
Well the "fraud" also works in other ways because of how the laws and legal system are set up. For example I was rear ended in my car 3 years ago while I had pulled over and stopped to let a OPP car responding to a call travel unimpeded. While I was stopped and waiting for the cruiser to pass I was rear ended by another motorist. I, after following the law, am now being sued even though I was the one who was rear ended and I was not at fault and for all intents and purposes was the "victim" in this. My insurance company has to pay to defend me in all this nonsense. I do NOT like the high rates (compared to other places) I have to pay and I agree something needs to be done about it but things need to be changed in the system for this to happen, then the system also needs to change to keep insurance companies from gouging our wallets.

Also I agree that we should get bigger discounts on multiple vehicles insured by a single person but I also have to admit I did have both my cars and my bike on the road 2 weekends ago all at the same time so I can understand why its not the price of just one at any given time but it should not be the full price of 3 because how often does that happen.

Sorry Tired ramblings
 
The "Insurance Fraud is to blame for high rates" line doesn't hold water.
If that was true - why aren't insurance companies doing something about it - other than passing the cost to us? This arrangement works for them (they are reducing coverage AND increasing rates for everyone, while blaming fraudsters).

Insurance companies are always trying to find ways to prevent and investigate fraud, millions of dollars every year are wasted investigating claims and fraud, it takes months before they get permission from our Canadian legal system to investigate a person/people/companies for fraud, on top of that it takes years before a case is made and people are arrested, things don't happen over night.

As stated in this thread, it could be solved in few really simple steps - have a clause in policy that it is only valid while vehicle is operated by First Last name.
If anyone else is driving - they are driving without insurance. - How easy is that?

It would be great if it was that simple, unfortunately as brokers we heavily rely in the principle of utmost good faith in the answers the insured is giving us, the law will not allow us to do that without a reason. If that clause was imposed on every policy, that would mean: your sister, brother, friend, father, mother, or anyone would not be able to drive your car as they would be driving without insurance, that clause will never happen.

If parents are taking policies and letting their kids drive - why aren't insurance companies doing something/anything about it? They are aware of the problem, it is very costly problem, but instead of introducing simple option, they would rather continue to pass the cost of it onto us... and still blame someone else... This is the complacency of well established racket... Brazen, arrogant thieves acting the way they do - because they are above the law.

Are we to call the person on the phone a liar?? What would be the simple option?? How about people telling the truth, it would be much easier.
Should we investigate every policy, that would mean more millions of dollars wasted, who would pay for it, us the consumer.


Everyone knows how fraud works - from towing to body shops to medical exams/procedures. There's no great mystery here.
There are prolific surveillance technologies these days - start recording these real fraudsters and throw them behind bars - shake up that entire circus and bring some discipline and accountability into that system. Win /Win situation... but insurance companies are not interested in that, status quo works just fine for them.

Blame for this travesty we call Ontario Insurance Act lies flat on insurance companies and politicians they pay off year after year.

It's a constant battle with fraud, surveillance, investigations are going on 24/7, how about people start reporting known fraud to the insurance companies, or even better not being part of it. Unfortunately when there is an opportunity to make a couple of thousand of dollars on a claim everyone jumps aboard.

Example: Subject A, vehicle was broken in during the summer time, calls to make a claim, Subject A has a 13 year old car and a Tenants policy valued at $20,000.
Subject A is claiming his stereo got stolen valued at $1000, leather jacket stolen $1500 and 2 sets of golf clubs valued at $5000
What do you guys think of that, think about for a few seconds and read the next line.

Stereo very possible don't even question it.
Leather jacket, who the heck has a leather jacket during the summer in the car
Golf clubs: His life style does not match the life of someone who can afford $5000 golf clubs, 13 year old car and a tenants policy only valued at $20,000
Proof was required to claim the clubs and jacket, he could not provide proof of purchase or even where he bought the items so the insurance company could investigate, he said he forgot.
I can pretty much tell you if I spent $5000 in golf clubs I would know exactly where I bought it from
He got $1000 minus his deductible for the stereo

The opportunity presented itself and they went for it.
 
Last edited:
millions of dollars every year are wasted investigating claims and fraud

Wasted?

See, you are the broker, and while I repeatedly state "it's not brokers fault" - your stance on this makes it hard for me to continue with that.

So you think we (consumers) should do the work of fighting fraud? Not the insurance company who taking all the profit and is making us pay for that fraud?

Police doesn't have time for it - but they do have time to hand out tickets and essentially act as agents for insurance companies (again - for profit companies).
Police is enabling insurance companies to adjust/hike my rate, but insurance company doesn't pay for that work - I as a taxpayer pay for that policing service.

All the risks and costs are socialized (spread among us consumers) - while all the profit is private - goes to insurance corporations, and well, since you're so persistent, profit also goes to you - the broker (again, private/corporation).

This arrangement within government enforced system is deeply insulting. No taxpayer would ever agree to this.

If you want to talk about wasted millions, perhaps you should look into insurance companies paying "scientists" to spin statistics and forecasts on their head to make a case for hiking rates, where there's no actual need for a hike.
 
Is bike insurance any cheaper in the provinces like BC and MB that have government operated vehicle insurance systems?
 
The private insurance companies are scammers and gougers and not into giving discounts indeed I found the opposite to be true because they'll pad your insurance bill if you don't watch them constantly.
I have to go to war with my insurance company every second renewal or so for adding stuff to my policy that I wasn't consulted about and didn't agree to for example the add-on coverage & premium for a replacement vehicle if an insured vehicle is disabled in an accident.
I own 3 vehicles ........... WTF do I need replacement vehicle coverage for?
But sure enough every 2nd renewal it is there along with the add-on premium and it's a battle on the phone to get it taken off.
 
See, you are the broker, and while I repeatedly state "it's not brokers fault" - your stance on this makes it hard for me to continue with that.

So you think we (consumers) should do the work of fighting fraud? Not the insurance company who taking all the profit and is making us pay for that fraud?

I get you're point and you're not directing anything at me because I'm a broker, as brokers we get to see the other side that that most people don't.
No consumer should be involved in fight fraud, should we reported? yes, but do we? no, should we take advantage when the opportunity arises, no, but we do.

Yes we all hear in the news "ABC Insurance Company" profited $200,000,000 dollars this year in insurance, we look at the number and first thing that comes to mind: "of course they made so much money, they are scamming us"
What TV doesn't tell you is that profit is only 5% of the gross income, the other 95% is spend in wages, technology, rent, investigation, claims payouts, etc, etc.

Police doesn't have time for it - but they do have time to hand out tickets and essentially act as agents for insurance companies (again - for profit companies).
Police is enabling insurance companies to adjust/hike my rate, but insurance company doesn't pay for that work - I as a taxpayer pay for that policing service.

I'm not sure if I follow the above sentence, are you saying the Police work for the insurance companies?
It's the Police's fault the driver is driving recklessly and they give tickets to prevent something serious from happening

All the risks and costs are socialized (spread among us consumers) - while all the profit is private - goes to insurance corporations, and well, since you're so persistent, profit also goes to you - the broker (again, private/corporation).

Very well said, "the risk and costs are socialized and spread amongst everyone"
We brokers get paid yes, I think we all have a job/career to support our families and make a living, no different from working at a bank, legal firm, etc, etc.

The private insurance companies are scammers and gougers and not into giving discounts indeed I found the opposite to be true because they'll pad your insurance bill if you don't watch them constantly.
I have to go to war with my insurance company every second renewal or so for adding stuff to my policy that I wasn't consulted about and didn't agree to for example the add-on coverage & premium for a replacement vehicle if an insured vehicle is disabled in an accident.
I own 3 vehicles ........... WTF do I need replacement vehicle coverage for?
But sure enough every 2nd renewal it is there along with the add-on premium and it's a battle on the phone to get it taken off.

That shouldn't be happening, once you asked for endorsements to be removed they should never be added back on the policy unless you say so.
That might be an issue you need to resolve with your insurance carrier.
I would take that matter to the next level of management to get it resolve.
 
You do understand the difference between revenue and profit? Insurance companies are raking in huge profit (after all costs you mention).

You miss some points - When costs and risks are socialized and profit and decision making is in hand of few private corporations - it has next to nothing to do with "brokers have to make a living too". If insurance brokers fall into public service, you would still make a living.
Point is - Corporation knows, any bad decision or lousy business move won't hurt it so much - all it has to do is artificially jack-up liberality coverage for autos, and we have no choice but to pay... and they can continue playing loose...

Here's a scenario - floods in Alberta. Our car insurance goes up. When we ask why, we are told Insurance Companies lots a lot of $ paying flood damages...

Car insurance is mandatory and enforced by Ontario Government. I have no problem with that. But when for-profit insurance company leverages other non-related costs and payouts it has to make against our basic (mandatory) rates, it becomes a travesty.
 
You do understand the difference between revenue and profit? Insurance companies are raking in huge profit (after all costs you mention).

Yes they are making money, I wouldn't call it "huge profit", 5% is not that much when the average small business is making an average of 7-11% profit.
Everyone looks at the amount not percentage, it requires billions of dollars to run an insurance company.

Point is - Corporation knows, any bad decision or lousy business move won't hurt it so much - all it has to do is artificially jack-up liberality coverage for autos, and we have no choice but to pay... and they can continue playing loose...

Why do you think smaller insurance companies are being bought out by the big players? Because they can no longer afford to remain afloat, expenses, payouts are more than the income, they have to sell of go bankrupt, I can name a few but i won't.

Here's a scenario - floods in Alberta. Our car insurance goes up. When we ask why, we are told Insurance Companies lots a lot of $ paying flood damages...

I'm glad you brought that up, let's take a look at the flood that happened in the GTA last year.
One of my bigger companies paid out more in 1 month than the previous whole year. The average claim paid out was $60,00 for water, sewer backup.
Most people won't pay $60,000 worth of insurance in their life time with auto and home combined.
 
Is bike insurance any cheaper in the provinces like BC and MB that have government operated vehicle insurance systems?

Yes, no one pays more than Ontario. In Quebec, a portion of insurance cost are tied to gas taxes (the more you drive, the more you pay).
 
Yes they are making money, I wouldn't call it "huge profit", 5% is not that much when the average small business is making an average of 7-11% profit.
Everyone looks at the amount not percentage, it requires billions of dollars to run an insurance company.

Insurance companies are audited to make 15% profit, but several audits have shown much higher than that. The industry claims 5%, but those are numbers based on industry self-audits, and just used to counter political pressure. 5% profit? Then explain the hundreds of millions of dollars in marketing campaigns and the tallest skysprapers in every city in Ontario.

Why do you think smaller insurance companies are being bought out by the big players?

Because the big players are controlling the market and eliminating competition. This is how big business is done in Canada. This is why Rogers and Bell have telecom monopolies, and why Canadians pay more for less.

I'm glad you brought that up, let's take a look at the flood that happened in the GTA last year.
One of my bigger companies paid out more in 1 month than the previous whole year. The average claim paid out was $60,00 for water, sewer backup.
Most people won't pay $60,000 worth of insurance in their life time with auto and home combined.


So a few hundred claims of $60,000, versus ~1 million homes who pay every year with no claims. People don't pay $60,000 in insurance with two cars and a house in a lifetime? i'm already at twice that and have never made a claim

Insurance is parasitic, and it is manipulative. Your arguments that insurance is a non-profit venture just highlights how we should eliminate private insurance. If the government insists on laws of insurance, then they must provide affordable insurance.

This is why Ontario is financial ruin, we have been taken over by the services industry of people in office cubicles who are only paper shufflers and add nothing to the real economy, because nothing is added, or produced.

Even when Bob Rae was voted in as Premiere on the promise of creating a public insurance plan, he underestimated just how corrupt and powerful the insurance industry is in Ontario, and he likely got bought out like all the others.

Sorry if I don't take any of your posts seriously, but your job is to lie to people and take money for nothing.
 
Yeah I dunno what rates that guy is talking about but I'm pretty sure most people will pay more than $60k in insurance in a lifetime. Even if you only paid $1k/yr (which is a low rate to cover both your car and home) that's only 60 yrs of insurance and most people pay higher rates than that.

Also, the percentage profit doesn't matter nearly as much as the amount, IMO, contrary to what you're saying. Even if the mom and pop store is making a higher percentage they're still only making thousands in profit over the year. Whereas insurance companies will say they need to raise rates because they wanted to make $4 billion and only made $2 billion instead.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom