ICBC faces financial crisis
 

ICBC faces growing financial crisis

Times Colonist
June 8, 2016 12:00 AM

ICBC faces growing financial crisis

Last week, the provincial government allowed the Insurance Corp. of B.C. to quietly release its annual report for 2015. There was no fanfare and not even a press release from the government’s large and eager public-relations crew.

Why? Because our public auto insurer recorded one of its worst financial years on record. The compulsory basic insurance program lost $256 million, while the profit for the overpriced extension coverage rose by $100 million.

Is there greater carnage on our roads? ICBC reports that the number of reported claims actually declined by 9.5 per cent last year. Yet the cost of basic claims jumped by $320 million, or 14 per cent (up 26 per cent in three years), mainly as a result of the escalation in pain and suffering costs. The value of the corporation’s claims backlog climbed to $9 billion, and the corporation’s capital reserve fell to $3.1 billion, which is below the target deemed as safe by the ICBC board.

What is the government doing to address the growing financial crisis at ICBC, besides ordering the transfer of $450 million of optional policyholders capital to the basic program? It is actually making things worse by taking about $500 million in cash over the past three years, and suppressing basic rate increases. The cash helps to reduce the government’s direct debt, and the suppression of rates … well, there is an election in less than a year.

Richard McCandless

Saanich

ICBC slips out bad news balance sheet
Crown auto insurer’s net income plummets in face of higher claims, cyber security threats, shifting demographics

June 7, 2016, 8:06 a.m.
By Bob Mackin

https://www.biv.com/media/filer_publ...-2_upscale.jpg

https://www.biv.com/article/2016/6/i...balance-sheet/

The Insurance Corporation of B.C. (ICBC) lost $256.8 million on basic coverage last year, according to the Crown auto insurer’s annual report, which was released last week.


The results for the year-ended December 31, 2015, were published in an updated version of the ICBC three-year service plan on its website. Underlying data says the file was modified May 31, but no news release was issued.

“They always publicize the good news; they don’t publicize the bad news. This is very bad news,” said Rick McCandless, a retired former assistant deputy attorney general who studies ICBC. “This current pattern is unsustainable.”

Net income fell from $372 million in 2014 to $131 million in 2015, which was $79 million lower than budgeted.

Said the report: “These decreases are primarily due to higher claims costs partially offset by higher investment income and higher premiums earned.”

It blamed the frequency and cost of injury claims, higher legal and medical costs and more lawyer-represented claims and the number of catastrophic claims, which lead to higher settlements.


In 2014, ICBC reported $87.1 million net income on basic coverage, meaning a negative swing of nearly $344 million in 2015. It did, however, show an optional coverage revenue increase in 2015 of more than $100 million to $387.3 million.

The company had a $666 million underwriting loss on $4.5 billion revenue and $5.21 billion expenses. Investment income of $920 million, more than double what it had budgeted, kept ICBC out of the red in fiscal 2015.

But the company’s basic coverage equity fell to $1.05 billion from $1.63 billion and total equity dropped to $3.15 billion from $3.6 billion. Because of the low-interest rate climate, the Crown corporation admitted that it cannot rely upon investment returns to offset claims costs.

“Typical of other property and casualty insurance companies,” the annual report stated, “ICBC faces other financial and non-financial risks such as changing demographics, increase in sophistication of cyber security threats, natural catastrophes, volatility in investment markets and global uncertainty, all of which we continue to monitor.”

The report added that ICBC’s battle against fraudulent claims has expanded to a cyber crime unit that monitors the Internet and social media. The ICBC special investigations unit opened 5,000 claims investigations in 2015.

NDP critic Adrian Dix said ICBC’s balance sheet would look a lot better had the BC Liberal government not “scooped the financial heart out of ICBC” by transferring $1.2 billion since 2010 to the central government to help it balance the budget.

“Up to 2010, ICBC was largely run as a non-profit automobile insurance company,” Dix said, “and it has been transformed by reducing service and on a political level by becoming a source for the government to raid.”

In the summer 2013 edition of B.C. Studies, McCandless authored a 40-year analysis of political influence on B.C. public auto insurance from 1970 to 2010.

McCandless said whichever party forms government after the 2017 election will be facing a serious problem because ICBC is “becoming more and more expensive and less and less affordable.”

Last fall, ICBC applied for a 5.5% increase to basic insurance rates.

In his 2013 paper, McCandless noted that there have been sporadic efforts to de-politicize the company, “since voters are its customers, it is necessary for all governments to retain influence over its affairs.”

But he said ICBC no longer tries to provide low-cost auto insurance, instead it resembles a commercial operation providing profit to government.

“It seems ironic that, by 2010, the Liberal government, which promised to de-politicize the relationship with ICBC had more control than ever over its operations and rates through various cabinet directives,” McCandless wrote.

Well maybe if the Provincial government would stop pilfering ICBC's coffers, they wouldn't be in such bad shape.

Just sayin'.

Self-driving cars [for the non-enthusiasts] can't come soon enough.

leading the way to hike insurance again

Now I'm wondering, what would happen if ICBC disappears suddenly?

Private insurance probably won't have as good of a coverage as ICBC. Will we become better driver knowing that insurance coverage is reduced?

As much as I hate ICBC for raping my wallet all these years, I believe they protect us more than they drain the life out of us.

I think ICBC need to focus on investigating frauds and such and fine those who is caught for lying.

good.

end icbc.

let the private companies come.

Fuck private insurance. No thank you.

Private insurance won't be cheaper, especially based on the low population of our province. If you look into other provinces' insurance rates and coverage, you will find the two most cost effective and comprehensive medical coverage come from the two provinces with provincial run auto insurance.

grass is always greener

$700/year for two cars in Seattle full coverage. I know this isn't realistic for bc, but once the markets are competitive with private offerings I have faith it will be cheaper than icbc.

if you think what you're paying for icbc is fair... then you're part of the problem imo.

using the first result on google without actually looking into sources:

https://www.arcinsurance.ca/blog/ave...ian-provinces/

Now compare those policies to the medical coverage offered within the compared premiums - some start with a $10,000 maximum hospital stay; pretty useless if you break a hip in an accident or worse. So I don't think I'm part of the problem, I think I'm a little more educated on the matter.

Oh - and Ontario topped the list and they are private insurance. Private insurance legally changes their rates based on various personal factors, such as: sex, marital status, where you live, etc. You name it, they will find a way to balance the sheets.

I always thought ICBC should generate extra revenue by giving multi car discounts like all other insurance companies.
Say you have a daily driver and a toy car for weekends and stuff. Or you have a big truck but want a little Civic to save on gas for work. There should be a way to get a steep discount insuring a second vehicle for pleasure use. More people paying into ICBC, and if people don't drive them much, less risk of them making accident claims.

But I don't think ICBC is rational. I think it's a management-heavy monopoly of the BC government that would lose money selling liquor in a whorehouse.

Everyone should keep in mind ICBC has to insure everyone on the road. Private insurance can refuse insurance to anyone. Imagine if the next guy who hits you is not insured, guess what you now have to sue the other driver and if he doesn't have a pot to piss in good luck to you. Yes I realize there's under insured coverage but every private insurance company's policies are all different. Lets not even get started on vehicle repairs from private insurance, if you think ICBC is bad....... but of course there's always pros and cons to having both

Not sure if srs or just stupid.

Insurance companies would very much prefer receiving insurance premiums in exchange for policies that will have extremely low possibility of accidents/not having to pay out claims.

Why not allow ICBC to operate with competition then? If the competition sucks, people will use ICBC.
If ICBC sucks, then people will flock to the competition.
The only reason they have to insure everybody is because they're the only one allowed to sell basic car insurance.

Besides, if a driver sucks, ICBC raises rates pretty damn high. Not like they're charging 10 dollars a month.

hard for ICBC to compete when the government keeps pulling on the strings.

Fraud of people who claim injuries who aren't actually injured is rampant.

yeah that's kinda true.

In the states, you can typically insure a car for $300/year, but maximum coverage is usually $10,000 to $50,000 for third party liability and all that.

ICBC will cost you $3,000+/year for exact same car, but it's very typical to see people driving around with at least a few million $ coverage.

Not true.

Unless BC makes a law that private insurance company can ONLY operate in BC, we will most likely have insurance company from all over Canada or North America.

Those private insurance company does not have to strictly stay in BC, they will probably have a huge customer base all over North America or Canada. Whereas ICBC's customers are strictly for BC residence.

Also, let's face it. It's no secret that people in BC hate ICBC (generally). Maybe it's time for a change?

Ontario has 13 million population, almost half the country, and private insurance. Average male will pay $50k more in their lifetime for similar car insurance versus ICBC. I fail to see how our 3.3 million population will be treated better than a significantly larger population base, but I guess you can have hope and forget data.

That's what lawyers are for. They seem to be fine in the US. If you're lazy and want ICBC to take care of absolutely everything in the process then you've got to pay for it.

Yeah, we don't have to worry with the medical bills they do in the states, so I'm OK with less coverage here. Optional coverage is just that, optional. If you're unlucky enough to need more coverage than you have, then youre SOL. Private can change rates and choose not to cover you, but ICBC wants to raise rates all day and spew bs about rate reductions when really they're just going up as well.

For what it's worth I've been on the giving and receiving end of ICBC claims, and the straight forward dealings have been ok, but like any other insurer, the payout is where the complications start.

Like I said, the grass is always greener :badpokerface:

The population has nothing to do with it. (Btw Google says BC population is 4.3 million)

If private insurance companies were allowed to enter BC market, I don't see how they're going to charge more just because we're in BC.
That's like saying TD Bank will charge more for banking fees just because BC has less population.

The only reason why they would charge more, would be if BC has significantly more probability of getting into an accident.

Although I do not have a data, I heard BC is safer than the rest of Canada due to much less snow we have here.

Full coverage means different things even assuming the same collision, comp and third party liability coverage.

Accident benefits are vastly different and usually much lower than in BC. icbc's process is positively steamlined compared to some private insurers.

That being said I think icbc has a broken culture.

I'd like to bring this up for people who just skipped over this.

I doubt ICBC is willing to release these statistics, but I can almost surely gaurentee that people making basic claims and claiming injury is up. This directly causes ICBC to have lawyers get involved, which is not cheap.

I'm also all for ICBC getting the boot.
$2000/year for an 08 Mazda3, and spotless driving record is stupid.

No way it is that high if you are on full discount.