Ontario Insurance Reform - Can we be loud unough to hear? | Page 3 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Ontario Insurance Reform - Can we be loud unough to hear?

I've read some of your stuff from your accident, nasty bit of business
so you have different insight into the issue than I may have

but I'd still like to see AB as optional coverage
many have extended health benefits through work
that will cover off the shortfalls of OHIP

it should be our choice to buy the extended coverage
or pass if we don't need/want duplicate coverage

but it's unlikely to happen
AB came about, around the same time as the FedGov was trying to balance their budget
they did it by cutting transfer payments and downloading services to the provinces
Ontario found a way to download part of the biggest public expense - healthcare
to our private auto insurance

the bone they through to the insurance industry to go along
was they eliminated the right to sue except for extreme circumstances

game, set match - Ontario rate payers got hosed
then the fraud started, and AB became the most expensive part of an auto policy

So if I understand correctly, the gov is using auto (vehicle) insurance to prop up the health care funding, while giving insurance companies incentive by almost guaranteeing them some kind of way to make (more) money. While not going after people defrauding the system, because they can use this to charge more.

If this is the case, ya I have to agree it is fixed, (gov won't want to loose that revenue stream or can't), and we are f'd.

But we should try anyway. This is a democracy right?
 
There is a forum for input ............ Survey: making auto insurance more accessible and affordable in Ontario

https://www.ontario.ca/form/survey-making-auto-insurance-more-accessible-and-affordable-ontario

There is a section for comments at the bottom of the survey

If Ontario riders want to raise awareness for unfair rates then this survey is a good start to making riders' views known. The Ontario insurance survey ends mid February so hurry.

The free-form part with a maximum of 500 words is useful to promote motorcycle concerns. I answered this way, feel free to copy or modify with your own comments, we need NUMBERS of RIDERS to promote our concerns:

Ontario motorcycle insurance does not have many competitors and is proportionately much more expensive than auto considering vehicles are parked for almost 4 months during winter. Comparative rates are much more reasonable in the USA and in Austria insurance companies issue a medallion which you carry with you on your person for liability coverage, as you can only drive one car or ride one bike at a time. This ensures that you have collision and third party liability for the vehicle you are currently driving/riding. The logic is that you can only drive/ride one vehicle at a time. It is in the public interest that Ontario should investigate such innovative insurance products/methods which both promote affordability and encourage all owners to buy insurance.
 
Do your part folks, fill out the Ontario insurance survey. I did mine today. Every complaint about our various issues may help, you never know.

"I have both a car and motorcycle. There are very few motorcycle insurers in Ontario to choose from. My current car insurer does not insure motorcycles. Yet they discount if more than one car is insured, or if you include your home policy. (Tied selling?) The government needs to change the law so that if a company insures cars, they must insure motorcycles, or all vehicles. Why should a company earn a profit in Ontario, and just cherry pick what they insure in regards to vehicles? Motorcycle rates have increased year after year with no end in site. Lack of competition is an issue that needs to be addressed. I am claims free in over 40 years of riding and driving. I am also puzzled why the basic accident benefits, which is mandatory, keeps escalating. OHIP and private employer insurance is the first provider before the policy has to pay anything. This is particularly annoying as I have to pay this twice, for each vehicle."
 
I just signed the petition. It is extremely well thought out and written. Well done.

Be sure to include a photo of yourself. That will be enough for them to listen.
iu
 
I signed it, thank you for putting it together. Cheaper insurance means I can afford more bikes in the garage
 
Well, I could see some bureaucrat dismissing the very last point of "encourage all owners to buy insurance", as they already have that covered with the $5,000 fine for driving without insurance.

If Ontario riders want to raise awareness for unfair rates then this survey is a good start to making riders' views known. The Ontario insurance survey ends mid February so hurry.

The free-form part with a maximum of 500 words is useful to promote motorcycle concerns. I answered this way, feel free to copy or modify with your own comments, we need NUMBERS of RIDERS to promote our concerns:
Ontario motorcycle insurance does not have many competitors and is proportionately much more expensive than auto considering vehicles are parked for almost 4 months during winter. Comparative rates are much more reasonable in the USA and in Austria insurance companies issue a medallion which you carry with you on your person for liability coverage, as you can only drive one car or ride one bike at a time. This ensures that you have collision and third party liability for the vehicle you are currently driving/riding. The logic is that you can only drive/ride one vehicle at a time. It is in the public interest that Ontario should investigate such innovative insurance products/methods which both promote affordability and encourage all owners to buy insurance.
 
So if I understand correctly, the gov is using auto (vehicle) insurance to prop up the health care funding, while giving insurance companies incentive by almost guaranteeing them some kind of way to make (more) money. While not going after people defrauding the system, because they can use this to charge more.

If this is the case, ya I have to agree it is fixed, (gov won't want to loose that revenue stream or can't), and we are f'd.

But we should try anyway. This is a democracy right?

yes, was part of the budget restructuring regime from the 90's
Feds raised taxes and cut transfer payments to the provinces
then congratulated themselves for getting a one time balanced budget

Provinces were forced to change the way they operated as well
so we got higher taxes, services downloaded to municipalities and lots of other stuff
Common Sense Revolution stuff

so health care being the Province's #1 expenditure, it got a look at
remember the hospital closures, war with the nurses union etc ?

so along with budget restructuring, health care restructuring
there was also the issue of auto insurance

are you old enough to remember Premier Rae?
he promised to tackle auto insurance, a public system
and failed as badly at that as he did everything else

rate payers were unhappy, insurance Co's were unhappy
so the Province cooked up this scheme that would take away the right sue
force auto insurance rate payers to purchase accident benefit coverage
some of the medical services that used to be covered by OHIP were transferred to auto insurance

insurers were happy, they were provided a new mandatory product to sell
and the courts were largely out of their business as far as accident compensation was concerned
Province was happy as it helped them work towards a balanced budget by making us pay twice for something

auto insurance rate payers got stuck footing the bill and at first it wasn't that bad
then the fraud started as there was little mechanism in place to detect and prevent it
Accident Benefit premiums soared to where they are today: the most expensive part of your policy
 
Last edited:
yes, was part of the budget restructuring regime from the 90's
Feds raised taxes and cut transfer payments to the provinces
then congratulated themselves for getting a one time balanced budget...
That's more or less what happened. Ontario liberals made the problem worse as they stood by and watched fraud creep into the system. Stamping out fraud was a double edged sword - as manufacturing was fleeing the province, fraud fueled the rehab industry it started to fund thousands of jobs -- the reason Wynne didn't come through on her stretch goal is she didn't want to see a few thousand more jobs leave the province. Instead she let the fraud stay to support the lowlife rehab clinics, lawyers, and fraudsters who found ways to exploit the system.

The insurance industry doesn't care -- the Province simply lets them adjust rates to offset the fraud losses and guarantee profit. The only way they would care is if the market shrank under cost pressure -- that's not going to happen anytime soon.

The real solutions require a few things IMHO:
1) Return the cost of fraud to the insurers, along with regulations that limit compensation for all but life changing injuries
2) Also relax mandatory benefits - let drivers choose
3) Open competition to allow banks and foreign insurers full access to the market then allow and encourage innovative insurance products

Fixing this is going to take political capital. There is a well organized legal lobby disguised as a 'victims right's' group, they will be noisy and hard on the court systems. The insurance lobby will fight competition and innovation as that means they'll be working to make money.
 

Back
Top Bottom