Can insurance drop you for just a charge (without a conviction)? | GTAMotorcycle.com

Can insurance drop you for just a charge (without a conviction)?

drumstyx

Well-known member
I was charged with careless a couple months ago during an accident. Setting aside what happened and what was deserved, my question is strictly about legal/policy.

My broker said my insurer asked if I've received a court date yet. Being that it was only a couple months ago, I have not, but of course I am fighting it, and have retained representation. My renewal date for my car is November, and my bikes renew in February. Any conviction, reduced or otherwise, would not happen until well after November.

My concern with them asking this question is, can they drop me/raise my rates for simply being charged? I had the understanding that only convictions can affect you, y'know, innocent until proven guilty. What does it even matter to them when my court date is?
 
So why do they care about when my court date is? Was that just a sly way of asking if I'm going to fight it? Even then, why do they care, they'll just drop me/rate me if I got a conviction.
 
Could be the broker was just being nosey..lolCould also be so they can put a note on your file to ask/check for convictions before you renew in Nov. Say you go to court in late aug, and your convicted then they can run your record before they send out the renewal. If your renewal is say 15 nov and your conviction is registered on 20 Nov then your good as gold till NEXT renewal.

But seeing they know of the charge, one would think there is a higher probability they will run your DL before offering a renewal.
 
After a charge i think they just want to know when they can wrap up your case. This happened in my wife's case. They just want to know the outcome of your charge.
 
The op indicated they were charged as a result of an accident.

I wouldn't worry about the outcome of the course case. They are likely fishing.

But, they can still drop you at renewal for simply having a claim due to the accident.
 
The op indicated they were charged as a result of an accident.

I wouldn't worry about the outcome of the course case. They are likely fishing.

But, they can still drop you at renewal for simply having a claim due to the accident.

Sure, but in accordance with some standard of practice, right? I'd imagine there are straight up rules in place so you can't just have insurers dropping people for one accident.
 
Sure, but in accordance with some standard of practice, right? I'd imagine there are straight up rules in place so you can't just have insurers dropping people for one accident.

Not really. It's entirely at their discretion.

They can say they dropped you because they changed their rating system and you don't fit.

They don't have to renew anyone.

But, if they have a reserve set for a claim or just feel you are at risk of costing them more money down the road, they simply drop you.

That's just the way it goes.

They will provide written notice to find coverage elsewhere.
 
Not really. It's entirely at their discretion.

They can say they dropped you because they changed their rating system and you don't fit.

They don't have to renew anyone.

But, if they have a reserve set for a claim or just feel you are at risk of costing them more money down the road, they simply drop you.

That's just the way it goes.

They will provide written notice to find coverage elsewhere.

It is not up to their discretion. It is all based on their underwriting guidelines filed with FSCO.

FSCO must approve the guidelines/rates prior to being put in place. It is not a simple process. If a client still meets their guidelines filed with FSCO, the insurance company is unable to non renew them.

Typically new business guidelines are more strict rather than renewal guidelines.

More than likely, if the OP only has the at fault loss on his record, without any other accidents/convictions, he will be offered a renewal.

Hope this helps.
 
It is not up to their discretion. It is all based on their underwriting guidelines filed with FSCO.

FSCO must approve the guidelines/rates prior to being put in place. It is not a simple process. If a client still meets their guidelines filed with FSCO, the insurance company is unable to non renew them.

Typically new business guidelines are more strict rather than renewal guidelines.

More than likely, if the OP only has the at fault loss on his record, without any other accidents/convictions, he will be offered a renewal.

Hope this helps.

Actually, I've had this at-fault, and a not-at-fault (confirmed 0%) about 1 month prior. Can't not-at-faults be held against me at all? I was under the impression that it doesn't matter at all...
 
It is not up to their discretion. It is all based on their underwriting guidelines filed with FSCO.

FSCO must approve the guidelines/rates prior to being put in place. It is not a simple process. If a client still meets their guidelines filed with FSCO, the insurance company is unable to non renew them.

Typically new business guidelines are more strict rather than renewal guidelines.

More than likely, if the OP only has the at fault loss on his record, without any other accidents/convictions, he will be offered a renewal.

Hope this helps.

If there was no discretion, they wouldn't need underwriters.

I understand there are strict governance but, insurance companies often review policies prior to renewal that have a claim.

And they can choose not to renew a policy for a simple claim.
 
If there was no discretion, they wouldn't need underwriters.

I understand there are strict governance but, insurance companies often review policies prior to renewal that have a claim.

And they can choose not to renew a policy for a simple claim.

Not true regarding auto/motorcycle insurance in Ontario. Home insurance is different though.
 

Back
Top Bottom