I ride and I drive, separate policies, same broker/underwriter. No matter how rationally I pose the question nobody can explain why accident benefits are paid per vehicle. I asked to have a single policy with bike and car together but am told it wouldn't change that I pay accident benefits per vehicle. Is the broker being honest? I have long years of coverage without claims, moving violations etc., have max. rating yet... have home insurance with same broker/underwriter.
Love to have another bike but another $650 in accident benefits is insulting and unjustified. T.O Star published an article yesterday that, in part discussed the future of accident benefits, in particular their mandatory status and whether or not that would change, become the operators choice in which case coverage for one vehicle would be enough (unless, checking in to the hospital with whatever injury the former "is this the result of a motor vehicle accident" becomes "is this the result of an accident on your first bike, your second or your car" and then we really are being bent over with no apologies). Anyways, just curious as to your experience(s).
Love to have another bike but another $650 in accident benefits is insulting and unjustified. T.O Star published an article yesterday that, in part discussed the future of accident benefits, in particular their mandatory status and whether or not that would change, become the operators choice in which case coverage for one vehicle would be enough (unless, checking in to the hospital with whatever injury the former "is this the result of a motor vehicle accident" becomes "is this the result of an accident on your first bike, your second or your car" and then we really are being bent over with no apologies). Anyways, just curious as to your experience(s).