Aviva is refusing to allow collision on any car over 500hp (split)

[killramos]

I’m 6 even for 4 cars + the house with extra coverage for valuables etc. (The 4 cars with gap coverage on 2 of them is the main problem ). Wife has a few tickets too.

4+ for house plus 1 car seems high for sure unless it seems one hell of a house and a ridiculous car.

[lilmira]

Same here, house and two cars with full coverage. I was paying just over 4100 and my renewal is at 4800. No ticket no claim and I'm sure neither of my cars has 500hp. Actually I'm happy to pay the new price if they can upgrade my cars to 500hp.

[A790]

So I whipped out the policy.

$4,082 for the house (duplex), car ('16 Audi A3, stock), and the bike ('06 FZ6). DId some online quotes that came in around $500/yr cheaper. I'm not going to move my relationship from Touchstone over $500 but I am now going to be checking annually to see if I'm getting hosed.

[Tik-Tok]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yea, this thread has got me thinking. At this point I just pay our insurance bill without really diving into it. Paying just under $4k/yr for 1 car (comprehensive) and the house. Wondering if that's a bit high.

That seems high to me, but obviously it depends on your vehicle, house, and coverage.

2 cars with $500 deductibles, 1 truck with plpd, and house insurance, we pay $3600 annually with Intact

[16hypen3sp]

House: $1440 (Portage)
2 Cars & 1 truck $500 deductible full coverage including rideshare premium: $3012 (Intact. Actually dropped $300 this year.)
3 motorcycles full coverage: $1440 (Echelon)
Total insurance cost: $5892

I was with Aviva for a long time but swapped to Intact because they were way more friendly towards rideshare.

[realazy]

House + 2 normal cars for $3451. Full coverage. Coesco (cooperators group insurance).

[Sugarphreak]

...

[Maxx Mazda]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So I whipped out the policy.

$4,082 for the house (duplex), car ('16 Audi A3, stock), and the bike ('06 FZ6). DId some online quotes that came in around $500/yr cheaper. I'm not going to move my relationship from Touchstone over $500 but I am now going to be checking annually to see if I'm getting hosed.

What do you mean you don’t want to “ruin your relationship “ with them? Insurance companies don’t give a flying fuck about loyalty. Go with whomever is cheapest.

[LilDrunkenSmurf]

Just reviewed my documentation last night, and Aviva is raising my rates by ~$400 for the year. That will likely go up even more, as one of the vehicles only has parking (comprehensive) insurance on it right now. I didn't even look at the home insurance, which is also through Aviva. My bike will likely remain with Intact, as I know that even if TD quotes me lower prices, they're notorious for having high motorcycle rates.

[94boosted]

house + 3 cars and a trailer (one of the cars only has fire/theft coverage for winter) - $3980
- lowest possible deductibles
- additional protection for mysterious disappearance of valuables (home)
- full glass on all cars
- $2MM liability

[A790]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

What do you mean you don’t want to “ruin your relationship “ with them? Insurance companies don’t give a flying fuck about loyalty. Go with whomever is cheapest.

Touchstone is my broker, and they've been fucking fantastic to me over the years. Case and point: he saw my post and messaged me with other options at lower prices.

I don't want to ruin my relatinship with them. I couldn't care less about the insurance company.

Bill from Touchstone literally saved me $15,000 at one point. He deserves my loyalty.

[ExtraSlow]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Bill from Touchstone literally saved me $15,000 at one point. He deserves my loyalty.

Bill has earned some loyalty from me as well. He made me $27,000 with some good advice. That's not to say I won't shop around, but I'm not going to jump ship from him for small dollars.

[A790]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Bill has earned some loyalty from me as well. He made me $27,000 with some good advice. That's not to say I won't shop around, but I'm not going to jump ship from him for small dollars.

Kinda my point. He also got in touch to clarify that my premium is actually $150 lower than I thought AND that my coverage is better than what rates I was getting quoted for.

So yea, staying put. In Bill we trust.

[blownz]

I think all of you Calgary guys should stop complaining so much and start thanking those of us in the rest of the province for keeping your increases to a minimum... Last time I complained about my yearly increases being way over the rate of inflation I was told that it was thanks to the weather claims in Calgary and southern AB over the last several years (multiple hail storms, flood). More recently the FM fire has obviously had a major impact on everyone as well. Fortunately and unfortunately everyone in AB has to share in the pain.

For the record, I am paying $437/month (>$5200/yr) for an average house, 2 cars and an RV. It is brutal. A handful of years ago that was under $300/month. Shit like this actually makes me feel for retired people on a relatively fixed income. That is a major hit over the years.

[Tik-Tok]

I should compare people in this thread complaining about increasing premiums, with the people who voted that I should do a personal injury lawsuit against the person who hit me in my insurance thread.

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If you buy a car, you are forced through legislation to get insurance if you want to drive it on the road.

Given that it happens to be property that often smashes into other peoples property, it is reasonable to mandate insurance, and I don't have an issue with that.


What I do have an issue with is that they mandate it, and then they wash their hands. If there is going to be government interference, then there needs to also be government oversight. This has been proven a number of times, with insurance companies in particular, otherwise they just restrict who they insure to the people who make them money. If they are going to mandate the public to get insurance for their cars, it is the responsibility of the government also to ensure that the public has reasonable access to insurance options and also to ensure that companies are not profiteering thanks to that forced interference.

This isn't a free market condition. A true free market would allow you to drive without insurance. Actually if we were not mandated to get insurance, the price for insurance would be actually end up being crazy cheap. Personally if I was in charge, I'd do it this way. I don't think the government should have the right to mandate insurance... but then again I also don't think they have the right to putting taxes on assets such as property, among other things. A rant for another day; /SP the capitalist.


Like I mentioned in the other thread, when I first moved here insurance companies were in the middle of getting out of insuring people under 25. In addition to the 5000$ premium, I actually had one company drop me, and 3 others reject me just because of my age back then. This thing with the 500hp cars is just more of the same garbage. The provincial government will need to step in and ensure that people who buy a road legal car in the province can also get insurance for it.

But you're not forced to buy a car. When you buy a car, and drive it on the road you are participating in a contract which has your side committing to insurance. (We can have another lengthy discussion about the joys of entering a contact where one side has guns and prisons, but that's a different discussion).

But that doesn't change anything about the realities of economics and the underlying mathematics. "government oversight" in pricing is just another way of saying "price controls". We know quite well how price controls impact an economic system. It ain't good. People tend to not understand insurance - which makes them think that pricing controls are somehow more functional. They are not. You will always run into the unintended (but not unpredictable) outcomes of price controls: supply issues, a gravitation towards implementing a public system to solve that problem, a resultant shift of liability to the taxpayer, etc.

The solution to the problem of creating artificial demand is not to create artificial supply. Then you're just making a single problem into two problems.

[ExtraSlow]

You are also not legislated to buy anything more than PLPD, which has legislated maximum prices.

[Tik-Tok]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You are also not legislated to buy anything more than PLPD, which has legislated maximum prices.

Stop talking facts here.

[NewLextasy]

Damn, I pay 13k a year . 4 cars and 2 houses with no tickets or claims on file.

And the 500hp thing is BS, I haven’t owned a car with under 500hp in over 10 years.

[killramos]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Damn, I pay 13k a year . 4 cars and 2 houses with no tickets or claims on file.

And the 500hp thing is BS, I haven’t owned a car with under 500hp in over 10 years.

The real man has spoken