How do they know what percentage of those KM's were highway on the weekend or city during rush hour commutes? Distance means nothing if you don't know where the car drives.
Posted via RS Mobile

These are also people who take care of their cars and while their vehicles have high value they're very unlikely to be the ones who make the roads less safe.

So yeah. That's kinda appropriate.

If they wanted to improve anything they should start at the beginning when we first get our L licenses, tests should not be multple choice and they should add more subjects like traffic flow how it works and how to avoid being the traffic jam.

As soon as you make a test not multiple choice though it becomes subjective and that makes grading difficult. How would you work around that?

I agree that traffic flow and rules about staying to the right and how to properly manuver in traffic should totally be on the test though.

As a guy who drives very little I think thats a great idea. My commute is only 5km's each way yet I pay as much as a guy with 100km commute.
Secondly this idea also promotes the use of transit. If you are not payin through the nose for insurance cus your insured for just basic weekend style driving your less likely to feel hosed for payin for transit on top of that for your downtown work commute.

it solves some problems but creates others.

i think someone who drives 50k a year is less likely to be at fault in an accident based on driving experience.

and this is coming from a guy who lives less than 1km from work.

1) disconnect audometer
2) drive all you want
3) pay nothing

??????

profit

lol....

1) buy a old car that the odo is not digital (like my corolla 1996)
2) 10mm ranch
3) .......
4) negative miles?!?!?
5) REFUND? xD
6) :troll:

maybe they should stop showing those stupid ads (fat lady) and they wont need to jackup rates

A new report commissioned by the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions recommends pay-as-you-drive insurance...

What does this have to do with ICBC?

Vancouver is becoming unsustainable!
Posted via RS Mobile

Wouldn't this qualify you to just get pleasure use insurance since the commute is less than 15kms? The guy commuting 100kms would need to have insurance that costs more than the standard pleasure use assuming they are declaring it like they should. At least that's how understood it. My commute is also very short so I have always been getting pleasure use.

I think the way things are is fine right now. I really have a problem with the other idea where they ding you even after 1 moving violation. I understand the principle but I find being penalized for 3 years after just one ticket is a bit much. I've had a very clean record (no tickets, no at fault claims) for 17years I've had my license. I have no issues if I were to get fined, but to have rates go up for 3 years after so many years of a clean record seems a bit unfair.

^ Agree

Now I can see a system where if you get multiple infractions in one year (like lets say 3 speeding tickets) the next year you are dinged. But if you're clean that year all goes back to normal.

need to quote a great meaningful post

how does congestion and pollution have anything to do with how much we pay for insurance/

Making changes in a test will not be helpful in any way. Afterall it's just a test which you just read and pass. What we do with our driving after we pass the test is entirely another story.

knowing is half the battle.

@TheNewGirl, yeah I guess your right on the multiple choice, didn't think of subjective answers at the time :P

FAIL.


Since I can't fail anymore.


Do you realize that this "report" has NOTHING to do with ICBC?

There is an insurance company down in the US called Progressive that has a system called "Snapshot". Here's a link for more info:

http://www.progressive.com/auto/snapshot-discount.aspx

The idea behind it, if I understand correctly, is for people to consent to having their driving habits being measured. By seeing how you drive (i.e. braking style) and what times you drive, Progressive may offer you a discount on your insurance rates. The unit apparently attaches to your OBD port to obtain these measurements. It sounds like an interesting idea and its an opt in I believe. Of course, there are concerns about what other information may be collected.

Will the idea work here in BC? ICBC doesn't exactly move very fast with regards to offering new ways to "measure" someone's insurance risk. Also, because its part of the Solicitor's General's portfolio of responsibilities, whatever significant changes occurs will probably incur a lot of government red tape. However, it would be cool and progressive if ICBC offered the possibility of their customers opting into such a program.

Rather than all this BS, why not make our public transportation better?

Our skytrain sucks big time because we can't get to station easily. In the US, the idea of public transportation is that they have a huge parking lot (usually free) next to their stations in the suburbs. So, people could simply drive to the lot and take train.

Very high end vehicles already get individually underwritten.

How the fuck is this douche's rationale for this "slowing down the carbon emissions freight train"............. as soon as everyone in India and China jumps on the car bandwagon, which they have been in DROVES the past few years, the planet is fucked anyway... why are we paying to cut down when our density is less than every developed country in the world and FAR less than some that are just starting to turn that page?

I think you're only thinking of the major cities in east coast US.

In general transit in the US is non existent to terrible depending on city and state. Or peicemailed together. Like Southern California. LA used to have a fantastic tram system that was deliberately dismantled by the car companies to get people in cars. Not it's got 1. horrible traffic and 2. a terrible and unreliable transit system. While San Diego kept their system in tact and improved upon it. It's user friendly, efficient and helps keep traffic off the road.

I like this idea if it could be accurately measured. I used to drive all over just cruising and could put on a thousand km in a weekend. Now I only drive once per week. Why should I pay the same insurance either way?

If I'm barely ever driving, I'd like to barely ever pay insurance.

Risk of an accident is obviously far less when you're on the road for less time.

I think the problem with LA is that it has expanded too far. Old suburbs became city centers (making big parking lots too expensive) and the transportation system not able to catch up.

Not sure about other places, but from what I see in Seattle (they rely on bus, but have many park and ride parks near where the Outlet is), Portland (again, park and ride parks. Not to mention free downtown transportation) and San Fran (In most major BART stations outside of San Fran, you have big ass parking lots, I used to live about a mile from the Fremont station with my oldest cousin and he always parks his car and ride the BART when he needed to be downtown.