Alberta Public Car Insurance Petition

[Xpnsve]

Hey guys, I'm thinking of running a petition to institute public automobile insurance in alberta.... I'm sure most of you are aware that british columbia and saskatchewan both have public insurance and pay less then half what we are currently paying.

I'll attach my MLA's response to my concerns as well as some other facts about public insurance.. please post comments and maybe look up some bad points to public insurance.

How many will support me in this?

here is the letter..

Thank you for your recent e-mail regarding car insurance.

Internal figures from the Insurance Bureau of Canada, an industry lobby group, indicate that accident claims increased by only 2.8% in 2002. This contradicts the IBC’s assertion that rising payouts to accident victims have increased premiums, which have risen a whopping 57% according to data from Statistics Canada. The government’s plan to cap awards will therefore not substantially reduce premiums for most drivers. Instead it will widen the benefit gap between Alberta and other western provinces. In addition, the freeze comes too late for drivers who have already seen their premiums skyrocket.

As you may be aware, the Consumers’ Association of Canada has recently come out with a study that shows that public insurance is the most affordable option for Alberta. The CAC study indicates that Alberta auto insurance rates are almost double what they are in provinces with public insurance. Increases have been much lower in provinces with public insurance plans. Since New Democrat governments in BC, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba introduced public insurance, consumers in those provinces have been getting a better deal.

As you may know, I recently outlined the New Democrat Opposition’s position on car insurance. I called for the adoption of a public insurance plan to reduce premiums, make rates fair and improve safety. For further information, please visit here (http://www.newdemocrats.ab.ca/autoinsurance/).

At this time, the ND Opposition does not have a petition. However, I would be happy to present one to the Legislature on your behalf. For information on how to correctly format a petition, visit here (http://www.assembly.ab.ca/pro/petition.htm)

Thanks again for writing. Please keep in touch.

Sincerely,

Brian Mason, MLA
Edmonton Highlands


Again, here is some other interesting facts..

Last year alone, auto insurance rates in Alberta increased by 57%.

But accident claims only increased 3%.

Young drivers and seniors pay more, even if they have a clean driving record.

Edmonton drivers pay more than Calgarians.

The Tories responded by locking in the highest rates in Western Canada.

The Conservative government has a plan they say will reduce rates. But by their own numbers, if everything goes exactly as planned, rates will only be reduced by 8%, after a 57% increase last year.

That’s not good enough.

According to the Consumers’ Association of Canada, Alberta insurance rates are 40% higher than in BC, 51% higher than in Saskatchewan, and 57% higher than in Manitoba.

The other western provinces have public auto insurance. They are the only places in Canada where rates have not increased beyond inflation.

Public insurance systems don't discriminate based on age or marital status.

Public insurance systems invest 30 times more on road safety than private systems.

Public insurance systems are far more effective at keeping uninsured drivers off the road.

Alberta needs a better deal on auto insurance.

Alberta needs public auto insurance.

A better deal for drivers:
The ND Plan for public auto insurance

1. A 35% reduction in rates
Public insurance is non-profit. Where private insurance companies have to produce profits for shareholders, our plan would pool profits back into the company in the form of lower premiums.

A public system reduces the costs of having multiple head offices (most of which are in other provinces), adjusters, estimators, and other staff. Public plans have proven able at bringing down costs through the establishment of province wide rates for body shops and other auto repair facilities.

2. A fair system of setting rates
A number of common factors affect what drivers pay for their insurance coverage. These factors include the driving record, claims history, the make, year and model of the vehicle, and purpose for which the vehicle is used.

Private insurers use a number of other factors not used in the public auto provinces to determine rates. These include the age, gender and marital status of the driver.

Our public insurance plan would end such discrimination. Rates would be based upon the driver's driving record, period. Under the ND public auto plan, good drivers would not cross-subsidize bad drivers.

3. Real regulation of rates
It may come as a surprise to many Albertans, but auto insurance rates are regulated. The Alberta Automobile Insurance Board (AIB) reports to the Minister of Finance. The AIB keeps a very low public profile. Applications to increase insurance rates are dealt with behind closed doors, and almost all of them are approved unchanged. The AIB acts as a rubber stamp for the insurance industry.

The New Democrat plan would transform the Automobile Insurance Board from an industry lapdog to a consumer watchdog. Rate increases would be dealt with through an open, public process where consumers would have standing and be heard.

4. Fairness for accident victims – Their day in court guaranteed
The Conservative government recently suggested limiting pain and suffering awards to accident victims as a way to reduce insurance premiums.

While there can be no doubt that this ‘no-fault’ system reduces costs, and therefore premiums, we believe that limiting the rights of victims is too high a price to pay. Accident victims should have the right to take their case to a judge if they feel their insurer, public or private, is being unfair.

Furthermore, the Tory plan was tried in New Brunswick and has failed. Insurance companies in that province happily accepted caps on pain and suffering awards, and kept the same high insurance premiums.

New Democrats would not take away the legal rights of accident victims or limiting their accident benefits as is being proposed by the Tory government’s industry-biased review committee.

5. Tackle uninsured drivers seriously
Uninsured drivers are a by-product of high insurance premiums. As premiums go up, the incentive to drive without insurance increases. These drivers (often drivers most likely to get into accidents) raise rates because those who obey the law end up covering the costs of those who drive uninsured.

Most jurisdictions have at least 5% of drivers operating without insurance. Over 5,000 drivers were charged in Alberta last year for not having valid insurance, and this is likely to be only the tip of the iceberg. The $2,500 fine is often still cheaper than paying for insurance, especially if a driver has had at-fault accidents. Even the insurance industry is asking for better integration between registration and insurance.

In BC, virtually no cars are on the road without insurance. This is because in that province, buying insurance and receiving a license plate are essentially the same thing. That’s because the public auto insurer also provides vehicle registrations.

While in Alberta you can’t register a vehicle that is uninsured, monitoring whether people fail to renew their insurance once a vehicle is registered is difficult.

New Democrats would integrate vehicle registration with the issuance of insurance policies to reduce numbers of uninsured drivers.

6. Invest in safety and accident prevention
In addition to government initiatives to improve traffic safety, public insurance plans invest directly in traffic and road safety programs to decrease accidents, fatalities and claims. ICBC in British Columbia is investing $40 million annually in road safety initiatives.

Under the ND plan, the public insurer would make substantial investments in traffic and road safety and capture the savings in the form of safer roads by reducing claims in high accident areas.

Private insurance companies have no similar incentive to invest in traffic safety. Because private insurers compete for the lowest risk drivers, investment in this area simply increases their costs relative to that of the competitors. Private insurers often just lobby for government spending in traffic safety.

7. Self-financed through driver premiums
The ND public auto insurance plan would is self-financed and involves no taxpayer subsidies. By the same token, it is also important that profits not be diverted out of the public insurance pool to support other government programs. Any dividends paid would by law have to be to policyholders, not taxpayers.

The Alberta Liberal plan for auto insurance would use the Stability Fund as a reserve if necessary. We reject this approach because it would mix tax dollars with premium funds.

Cost: $50 million paid back in one year, with interest
The costs of setting up a driver-owned auto insurance plan are modest. Our plan would use the existing insurance broker network to sell policies and handle claims, thereby keeping upfront costs low.

The Insurance Corporation of British Columbia (ICBC) delivers insurance through 900 private insurance brokers throughout the province (Source: ICBC 2002 Annual Report). Annual operating costs to administer the Autoplan are kept to a minimum.

In Manitoba and British Columbia, the government loaned the money needed for start-up costs. The loan in Manitoba was $320,000 in 1971, and the B.C. loan was $14 million in 1974. Both of these loans were repaid with interest within a year because premium revenue was sufficient to pay claims, overhead and start-up costs.

[Xpnsve]

Based on the experience of other provinces, the New Democrat Opposition is confident that a driver-owned plan could be financed with a start-up government loan of $50 million or less, to be repaid within the first year with interest.

1.Tell us your story (http://www.newdemocrats.ab.ca/interact/haveyoursay.php).
Have your insurance premiums increased? Having trouble dealing with private insurance? Email Us (http://www.newdemocrats.ab.ca/interact/haveyoursay.php) and tell us your story. Read other people's stories (http://www.newdemocrats.ab.ca/archive/insurancestories.php).

2. Download our plan (http://www.newdemocrats.ab.ca/pdf/position/autoinsurance.pdf).
"A better deal for drivers" outlines our detailed plan for cheaper, better, public auto insurance. Download it now to email to friends or to print and distribute.

3. Stay informed (http://www.newdemocrats.ab.ca/subscribe/index.php)


Auto Insurance News Releases (http://www.newdemocrats.ab.ca/autoinsurance/news.php)

[zhulander]

I'll definitely support this. :thumbsup:

[1badPT]

Only one side of the story has been told here unfortunately - and remember Mr. Mason needs your vote to get re-elected - so take that for what its worth.

I've seen both systems, and have even worked for a P&C Insurer (deals with car insurance) at one point. I do agree that the rates have really skyrocketed lately, but a lot of that has to do with the fact that most P&C insurers re-insure risks through "wholesale" insurers. Ever since Sept 11th, most of those re-insurers have been trying to finance their losses through increased premiums, which means they charge higher premiums to your P&C Insurer which in turn means your rates go up. If a P&C company was really agressive, it could tie up its investments in it's own bookof business, and undercut everyone else in the industry, but that won't happen since ROI's for insurance are typically 5% whereas if they keep their money elsewhere in real estate or equities they can usually make 10%.

[googe]

i say we just kill anyone associated with insurance companies and cause it to go public by default

[Khyron]

Sorry but a new driver (be it a 16 year old, or a 30 year old immigrant) are a higher risk than experienced drivers. They need to pay more. But at the same time there has to be reasonable access to insurance instead of gouging...

Khyron

[I_miss_my_MX3]

Originally posted by Khyron
Sorry but a new driver (be it a 16 year old, or a 30 year old immigrant) are a higher risk than experienced drivers. They need to pay more. But at the same time there has to be reasonable access to insurance instead of gouging...

Khyron


Those people may be higher risk, but don't you think that they should be given the benefit of the doubt? You shouldn't have to pay those ridiculous premiums just because you are a 16 year old male! if you are a 16 year old male that has already gotten into an accident, then the premiums should cost more. Remember that saying 'innocent until proven guilty'? That should apply in regards to insurance as well. Kids take drivers training to learn how to drive.. if you ask me, that's probably the best a person will ever drive in their life. Everything is fresh in a person's mind. I can tell you right now that I'm not as half a good driver as I was when I first got my license. I'm pretty sure that if I took a drivers test right now I'd fail.

Just an fyi, I'm a 24 y/o chick, not a 16y/o male who thinks insurance is unfair. Not unfair for me, but for those people who pay more in insurance in a year, than what their car is even worth.

[1badPT]

Originally posted by I_miss_my_MX3



Those people may be higher risk, but don't you think that they should be given the benefit of the doubt? You shouldn't have to pay those ridiculous premiums just because you are a 16 year old male! if you are a 16 year old male that has already gotten into an accident, then the premiums should cost more.

The problem with this is the fact that once a 16 y/o male gets into an accident, the probability is extremely high that he:
1) is dead
2) killed all or some of the occupants in the victim's car
3) won't buy insurance after the accident cuz he can't afford it.

What it means is, you have a horrible tragedy that the insurance company has to pay for, and the money for that comes from everyone else who has a policy with that insurance company - in essence you have a whole bunch of people who weren't involved in the accident, PAYING for the accident, then complaining that their rates have gone up. No one gets the benefit of the doubt with insurance - you prove your insurability. Its not a courtroom - you are indeed considered guilty until you can prove otherwise.

[I_miss_my_MX3]

Originally posted by 1badPT



What it means is, you have a horrible tragedy that the insurance company has to pay for, and the money for that comes from everyone else who has a policy with that insurance company - in essence you have a whole bunch of people who weren't involved in the accident, PAYING for the accident, then complaining that their rates have gone up.

Ahh.. no.. the reason rates go up isn't because of accidents.. it's because what the insurance companies do with your money is invest it.. And because the markets have been doing horrible, they have lost a s***load of $$.. They are using consumers to make the $$ back.

I haven't heard lately of a single 16y/o male getting into an accident and killing anyone or themselves.. If you ask me, it's mostly people in their 20's or old farts that are the problems.

[1badPT]

When I lived in Ontario, I was a RIBO licensed P&C broker, so I know a little about this stuff ;)

Every time the insurance company writes a cheque to pay a claim, it comes out of the company's reserve which is funded by nothing other than premiums. Premiums are collected from all policyholders whether they are good or bad risks so you can easily argue that any increase is because of a shortfall of premium dollars vs claims. Insurance companies may try to offset increases in premiums by investing part of the premiums in investments, but they are regulated to only invest in low risk investments, and a certain percentage must always be in reserve to pay claims.

In general young men are clearly higher risks than young women, and under the current set up they pay more. The new legislation which eliminates premium calculations with age simply means that low risk drivers are going to be paying higher premiums to cover for the higher risk drivers, who will very shortly be paying lower premiums.

[I_miss_my_MX3]

Originally posted by 1badPT

In general young men are clearly higher risks than young women, and under the current set up they pay more. The new legislation which eliminates premium calculations with age simply means that low risk drivers are going to be paying higher premiums to cover for the higher risk drivers, who will very shortly be paying lower premiums.

Yup, that means my insurance will go up.. Yay, I'm excited...:barf:

[Khyron]

So you think that people living beside the mississippi river should pay the same rates as people in vegas for flood insurance? It's the same thing - statistics dictate that living by a river means you are more likely to flood than in a desert. Same with young drivers.

And let's take your brilliant idea a step further - let's pretend everyone pays 1 dollar a month UNTIL they get an accident. Then they get shoved up the wazoo. Now someone paralyses a pedestrian and loses a million dollars in compensation. Where does that million dollars come from - the guy who was in the accident? No - insurance means you pay up front for the risk - the more risk you are, the more you pay. The only problem with Alberta is the rates are now becoming unreachable which is equally bad (because people will drive uninsured). But making everyone even unless they have an accident is kinda like fixing the wagon wheel after it's fallen off.

BTW - Unless you have alzheimers you better not be driving worse than you did at 16.

Khyron

[I_miss_my_MX3]

Originally posted by Khyron
So you think that people living beside the mississippi river should pay the same rates as people in vegas for flood insurance? It's the same thing - statistics dictate that living by a river means you are more likely to flood than in a desert. Same with young drivers.

And let's take your brilliant idea a step further - let's pretend everyone pays 1 dollar a month UNTIL they get an accident. Then they get shoved up the wazoo. Now someone paralyses a pedestrian and loses a million dollars in compensation. Where does that million dollars come from - the guy who was in the accident? No - insurance means you pay up front for the risk - the more risk you are, the more you pay. The only problem with Alberta is the rates are now becoming unreachable which is equally bad (because people will drive uninsured). But making everyone even unless they have an accident is kinda like fixing the wagon wheel after it's fallen off.

BTW - Unless you have alzheimers you better not be driving worse than you did at 16.

Khyron

Easy man! I'm just trying to give people the benefit of the doubt. And everyone is entitled to their opinion, so don't be so ticked that everyone doesn't see it your way. It's called free speech, so don't be so mean!

[Weasel]

Originally posted by Khyron
So you think that people living beside the mississippi river should pay the same rates as people in vegas for flood insurance? It's the same thing - statistics dictate that living by a river means you are more likely to flood than in a desert. Same with young drivers.

And let's take your brilliant idea a step further - let's pretend everyone pays 1 dollar a month UNTIL they get an accident. Then they get shoved up the wazoo. Now someone paralyses a pedestrian and loses a million dollars in compensation. Where does that million dollars come from - the guy who was in the accident? No - insurance means you pay up front for the risk - the more risk you are, the more you pay. The only problem with Alberta is the rates are now becoming unreachable which is equally bad (because people will drive uninsured). But making everyone even unless they have an accident is kinda like fixing the wagon wheel after it's fallen off.

BTW - Unless you have alzheimers you better not be driving worse than you did at 16.

Khyron


Your right in the fact that higher risk people should pay more than lower risk people but the real problem right now is that insurance rates are going through the roof for people who haven't done anything and paying $2,400 a year for my 1998 4 door sunfire with no accidents or tickets seems a little outragouse. (The car is probably only worth $7,000). Yea, I'm 19 and a male so that is taken into account but what we need to know is what these statistics are, like are insurance companies really being driven into the groun with record profits every new year ??? Come on it has to be reasonable though I do agree it should be statistic based, statistics can be bent and warped the same as anything else. We just need a fair third party to determine what is really true and what kinda profit those insurance companies are going to make. In a perfect world a public system would just pay for itself with no mass profits but with the goverments waste it might not even be ass effiecient as a private system. I don't know the answere but our elected officials need to do some in-depth research, present US with the results and take it from there. More info is needed, and FAST !!!

[Khyron]

Originally posted by I_miss_my_MX3


Easy man! I'm just trying to give people the benefit of the doubt. And everyone is entitled to their opinion, so don't be so ticked that everyone doesn't see it your way. It's called free speech, so don't be so mean!

Pointing out flawed reasoning and logic is not mean - it's how you debate and convince others. I used to be knee-jerk anti-SUV until I read enough posts pointing out the flaws in my thinking, which in the end changed my mind. I am perfectly willing to agree with you providing it makes sense. How fast does a bullet shot in the air hit the ground when it comes down? (Don't answer).


Originally posted by Weasel
insurance rates are going through the roof for people who haven't done anything and paying $2,400 a year for my 1998 4 door sunfire with no accidents or tickets seems a little outragouse. (The car is probably only worth $7,000).


The cost of the car isn't the issue. Even with just PLPD (no theft, collision, etc) your rates would be huge.

People should be able to afford basic PLPD (means if you crash it and it's your fault, you're screwed). I am totally willing to pay a bit more to bring their rates down. However, if a 16 year old is driving around in a brand new car, he or his parents can afford the insurance - otherwise, get a cheaper car.

I've only run down 2 pedestrians (technically not my fault but it's still bad news), and been in 2 minor crashes. All before I turned 19.

Khyron

[SpeedStar]

The point is people in Sask, BC, and Man pay less than Albertans. And as an Albertan I would like to pay less as well. If that means government owned and operated insurance, so be it. Saves me money. And what's there to complain about when it means you save money? :thumbsup:

(Just my humble opinion;))

[1badPT]

The difference in rates between the provinces has more to do with the fact that there are fewer accidents in other provinces - whether thats because they maintain the roads better, or have drunk drivers off the road, lower speed limits or a combination, the other provinces have lower risk which means lower premiums. It would be similar prices if it were a private company managing the risk.

If you want lower rates you have to be ready to give up some of the freedoms we have here in Alberta, ie lower speed limits, more stricter transportation laws, tougher control on alchohol and so on. In Alberta you're free to be doing what you want. But that freedom certainly isn't free.

[supaj87GTS]

I totally support this for sure....they shuld really lower the insurance rates for good drivers..

[Xpnsve]

ok guys, I've put up a site..

Alberta Public Auto Insurance Petition (http://apaip.com)

[SpeedStar]

How do you sign the petition?

[Toma]

Some of yuo are pathetic..... No wonder we get fucked, when so many of you are not only willing to bend over, you also are willing to grab both cheeks and open wide.....

It is not only insurance companies though....its EVERYONE. The lawyers that take 40%, the doctors that get paid $300+ for a signature on a single report, the autobody shop that double bills labour and bill full price for used parts.

People are last on the list IMHO. Injury payouts and accident are up, but to be honest, last time I was rear ended, I was tempted to fake a neck injury simply becasue I've been fucked by insruance companies for so long...I figred it was time I got something back.... I never did it, and won't, but can you balme those that do?

The whole system needs to be torn down and rebuilt.

[m10-power]

Originally posted by Toma
The whole system needs to be torn down and rebuilt.

Finally someone with a clue. Government run anything is a BAD idea. You think it will be cheaper? what it will do is become another cash grab, the rates may be cheaper initially but your going to get screwed if you need to make a claim. Especially if you have a modified car (who here doesnt?)

[1badPT]

Originally posted by m10-power

...<snip>

what it will do is become another cash grab, the rates may be cheaper initially but your going to get screwed if you need to make a claim. Especially if you have a modified car (who here doesnt?)

Actually, during the transition period, rates would most likely be much higher as the government establishes its "reserve". Plus if the government close the market on private insurance, they'll have to take over payments on accident benefit payments that are being paid out now through the insurance companies.

Really it doesn't matter if its public or private, rates will be high here because we love our cars, and we love to drive them fast and big and rough. The laws here are the most relaxed, so we have a lot of serious accidents in the province. Thats the price we pay to enjoy our cars. Really the only way to reduce insurance premiums is to reduce the risk - stiffer laws, stiffer penalties yatta yatta.

[d-UNiT]

where is the petition, i am and have been inferiated about the costs of insurance for well over 6 months now, i have taken my drivers course, and have a car but the ammount of money, they are trying to charge, a 17year old like myself, is absolutely ridiculous, how do they expect me to pay 5500/year for insurance, while trying to pay for other things that happen in my life, let alone, gas, sometimes the alberta legislative system is for a lack of better words stupid this is :bullshit:

[d-UNiT]

this should be a pretty popular thread, and i read the above posts and it seems like it has the attention of a lot of readers,.. hmm.. it would be quite nice to start driving soon.... does anyone know any other petition floating around?

[calgarys13]

im a 17 year old driver gettin gouged 2..i took the 3 best driving courses AMA offers and still am getting ripped off monthly...how are we supposed to have good drivers in the future if they can't afford to drive?

[d-UNiT]

exactly!.. how much are you paying.. cuz i got a quote on a 85 buick century for 5500/year.. and im supposed to get this money where?.. sure i have a job.. but... come on

[zoogooz]

i came from ontario to alberta, and really .. alberta to say sask... laws are similar. and speed limits are too... cars are safer now adays. vs. the 90km speed limit really is 55mph. set durring the oil crisis days. of the 1970s when cars 7000lbs. drove around with 4 wheel drum brakes. but yeah

there can be a transition phase.. where when your policy expires. you go to public. so then if you think of it. starting today. your paid your policy. or paying monthly. you get in an accident at the end. the insurance company allready recieved your share... and shouldnt be paying for repairs. bassed on your next year premium.. but then this way. 1 year. to fully take everyone on.. and really. if insurance say milked me for 5 grand. and we go public. i get hurt.. insurance is paying monthly payments to me.. say 1 month after. say example 1grand a month

why should they pocket 4 g. and have the rest paid by govt ... when the govt dident get a premium from me.. but yeah. really bc to alberta. or saskatchewn.. to alberta. really 40~50 % more accidents. i doubt it... i come from suburbs of toronto, and living right down town calgary is cheaper then the subburbs... really i dont care if public insurance is not staffed properly and poorly run.. when compared to private. so its not as efficient.. but driving right now. sask. was the worst. and maintoba. next then alberta. for quality of roads... so really i dont think there putting more into road work for safer roads. try driving around ontario. and its a legit scams.. i know people who would jump around with insurance.. they charge you 2months paymented up front. so stay insuraed for 2 months cancel. have there pink slip. and as long as its 1 day past your birthday... your car is good for another 12 months. and your activly insured.. at a road side stop. only time you wouldnt have covverage if you get in an accident.. but otherwise. no way of telling to know if your insured or not.


also govt does stupid shit.. ontario and the ETR... who built the electronic tool route.. highway.. tax dollars from ontario... i paid for that.. and they give them a 99 year lease... aka.. what is it now. 15 cents a km. plus 2dollars if you dont have a transponder. every time you enter and exit. and were fucked up the ass till cars fly... the lease is over. 2096.. another 90 years. or longer...

[HiTempguy1]

The only thing I really care about is why I have to pay double the insurance for having two cars when I can only drive one at a time?

ATM, I am a 18 year old male who has been driving (with my own drivers license) since I was 16. I took drivers ed, have 1 photo radar ticket (which I only recently got, and doesn't count for a premium increase anyways) and no other tickets. I pay $1450 a year on the dot for one vehicle. If I could have a lower insurance premium (of $1k or less) I would be all for public insurance.

[jdmakkord]

Back from the dead thread

[tentacles]

The only thing I really care about is why I have to pay double the insurance for having two cars when I can only drive one at a time?

What if you back out of your garage too fast, hit your other car and total both your cars? :D

[Fcuk]

Im in full support too of this too.

Insurance is a big fat SCAM.

[403Gemini]

Originally posted by tentacles


What if you back out of your garage too fast, hit your other car and total both your cars? :D

if you can total both your cars from just pulling out of your garage chances are those cars arent worth more than $1000 each ;)

[tentacles]

if you can total both your cars from just pulling out of your garage chances are those cars arent worth more than $1000 each

Ask any racer, doesn't matter if its my garage or the Deerfoot. Winning is winning.

[nonsane]

Originally posted by Khyron
So you think that people living beside the mississippi river should pay the same rates as people in vegas for flood insurance? It's the same thing - statistics dictate that living by a river means you are more likely to flood than in a desert. Same with young drivers.

I agree, but if i get in an accident then they assumed correctly however my insurance should not change then. Or it needs to be based on how many collisions/tickets you've had. Well at the moment it's both. How is that fair?

[three.eighteen.]

won't happen mang, i did some research into BCs public auto insurance - basically speaking it's a money pit for the entire province, the start up cost to taxpayers has still not been paid back and won't be soon (something like 5-7 million in the mid 70s if my memory serves me correctly)

Sure public insurance is great from the individual's perspective but economically speaking it is a complete failure.

In a forward thinking, conservative, economic growth-first province like Alberta it would never happen.

btw - I am an under 25 driver with 1 accident and a few tickets.

[khtm]

Originally posted by m10-power


Finally someone with a clue. Government run anything is a BAD idea. You think it will be cheaper? what it will do is become another cash grab, the rates may be cheaper initially but your going to get screwed if you need to make a claim. Especially if you have a modified car (who here doesnt?)
That's an ignorant response. EVERYTHING about ICBC is better than the situation here in Alberta.

Have you lived anywhere else??

[SilverBoost]

Originally posted by khtm

That's an ignorant response. EVERYTHING about ICBC is better than the situation here in Alberta.

Have you lived anywhere else??

Well if he hasn't, maybe he has by now, since he posted that almost 3 years ago. ;)

[sputnik]

Thats funny.

In Manitoba there are many people trying to abolish Public Insurance. Go figure.

READ THIS (http://www.newwinnipeg.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=gen;action=display;num=1157436743)

I've been insured by public and private insurance and prefer private insurance HANDS DOWN.

[sputnik]

ROFLCOPTER!

I just noticed that the letter is from Brian Mason. Of course the NDP would love public insurance. If they had their way the government would also run all oil companies, power companies and telcos. In addition to that all other big businesses would be unionized.

Just ask any Manitoban what the NDP has done for Manitoba in the past 8 years.

EDIT - Also noticed that this thread was created in 2003.

[Nissanaddict]

I have no experience with public insurance, but the parents do. Autopac (Manitoba). They buy their first brand new car ever (and the only one to this day) a 1990 Nissan Micra. Good little car, 5 of us fit in the 4 seats without a problem, burned no gas. With autopac, if a car is under a year old, they'll buy you a new one if it's totalled (I think that's how it works). 1 year, 2 months into ownership, some dork rear-ends my dad at a red light (car was completely stopped for about a whole minute, some guy in a truck drops something, looks for it, a full 70km/h on Inkster BLVD at the intersection on Sturgeon for any Winnipegers that know the place, car gets totally destroyed). Anyhow....at that point it was...1991 or 92....my parents had enough money to buy....a salvaged 1988 Corsica. I prefer my rates if I know that I'll get the money I deserve if anything happens. Hell, I totalled a car out of pure stupidity and got completely re-imbursed.

[LilDrunkenSmurf]

I got quoted... on my 92 civic hatch... 4200 for just plpd and collision... as a 18 year old driver... with a drivers course... i mean... when the yearly payments are MORE than the car itself, its just not very fair... i had to sign the car over to my parents, just so i could afford the insurance, so now i'm making payments on a car thats not legally mine. because of insurance.

[sputnik]

Originally posted by LilDrunkenSmurf
I got quoted... on my 92 civic hatch... 4200 for just plpd and collision... as a 18 year old driver... with a drivers course... i mean... when the yearly payments are MORE than the car itself, its just not very fair... i had to sign the car over to my parents, just so i could afford the insurance, so now i'm making payments on a car thats not legally mine. because of insurance.

If the car is worth less than the insurance policy why did you get collision insurance?

[adam c]

x1000 for support for lower insurance

[LilDrunkenSmurf]

the car is worth more... they quoted me the same for my old 86 accord though... that i only got plpd on

[frostyda9]

I got my license in BC when I was 16. Insurance was based on a "full rate" of XXXX dollars. Each successive year that I drove without incident, I received a 10% discount, up to a maximum of 40%. At 19 years old, with my 30% discount, I paid ~$900 per year for FULL coverage. When I moved to Calgary, my insurance jumped to $3300/yr. :thumbsdow I like the clean record-based discount idea of ICBC, if you manage to get out of your teenage years without marring your file, you are fully discounted by the time you're 20, and out of that highest risk group :thumbsup:

I know this is an old thread, but to this day I'm still a little
pissed about the amount of money I've thrown away on insurance here in Calgary.

[sputnik]

Originally posted by LilDrunkenSmurf
the car is worth more... they quoted me the same for my old 86 accord though... that i only got plpd on

PLPD is capped at $1800 for new drivers with clean records.

How many at-fault accidents have you been in?

[vwvvi]

Yeah, tell me about it. Fifty one years old, have never made a claim, have 36 years driving (I started with a motorcyle in Alberta at 14), I have lived in BC since 1986 with no claims and no tickets. My insurance for basic 3rd party liability is $830/year for a 900cc motorcycle. My buddy in Calgary pays $160 - $190 for motorcycles ranging from 650cc - 1200cc. Tell me what a great freakin' job ICBC is doing.

I guess if I was 22 and had no record or a very poor record I'd love government insurance. What the hell role does government have in running vehicle insurance???

[khtm]

^ That's only for a motorbike...car insurance in BC is WAY WAY cheaper. I have a 650cc bike and pay $600 in Calgary. But when I moved from BC my car insurance went from $800 a year to $3000.

Most people drive cars, so :goflames:

[bennyhanna]

On a Side note

My OLD car 2002 VW GTI was

$136 /month in BC

$1 Million 3rd part liability
$100 Deductable for Glass
$300 Deductable for Collision

When I moved to Calgary

$117 /Month Through TD
$1 Million 3rd party Liability
$250 For Glass
$300 for Collision

In My case it was cheaper for me to insure the car in Alberta and Not BC.

Im over 25 with 3 tickets in the past 5 years

[403Gemini]

I dunno i've taken too many CIP courses that the insurance rates actually start to make sense to me ;) That and i'm not 18 anymore so the rates dont effect me even half as much

[johnboy27]

I like Alberta's insurance rates. I am paying 2800 a year for full coverage on 2 cars. Back home in Nova Scotia I would have payed about 5-6000 for just the one newer one.

[Supa Dexta]

I dunno about that^.. I got my mother, a broker back there to do up a quote matched to mine out here.. Out here was $3800 full coverage at the time, and back there would have been 1800.. 2k cheaper!