[Eff-1]

we already have the points system. plus we have the driver risk premium.

now this

Drivers with speeding tickets or other traffic violations will be hit with higher insurance rates if a proposal by the Insurance Corp. of B.C. is approved.

The proposal will go to the B.C. Utilities Commission later this year and is part of a major company restructuring plan the insurance provider announced Wednesday.

Under the insurance provider’s current claim-rated scale, a driver moves down the scale for each year he or she does not make an at-fault crash claim. Every claim-free year increases the discount by five per cent until the driver reaches the maximum basic insurance discount.

Under the new proposed plan, called the “driving record model,” speeding and traffic violations would be included.

Mark Jan Vrem, spokesman for ICBC, said the change comes after years of customer surveys.

“We realized to be a successful insurance company, we have to be customer-focused and customer-based,” said Jan Vrem.

“We’re modernizing our company to better serve them based on the feedback we’re getting.”

One common complaint was customers felt it wasn’t fair that good drivers paid the same rate as drivers with a history of collisions and traffic violations, Jan Vrem said.

In response, ICBC will go to the B.C. Utilities Commission — which sets and regulates ICBC’s basic rates — in late spring or early fall with the driving record model proposal.

“The premiums that you pay will be reflective of your risk as a driver on the road,” Jan Vrem said. “If you’re in a number of collisions, or you receive a number of traffic violations, you’re going to be paying more than drivers who don’t.

“It will essentially follow the driver’s history. In other words, the policy will be on the driver, as opposed to the car.”

He said the driving record model will paint a more comprehensive picture of a driver’s history than the existing model.

Jan Vrem could not provide an estimate of what the revised rates or potential savings might be, noting each policy will be slightly different and the corporation is still “working [its] way through different scenarios.”

If approved, Jan Vrem estimates the driving record model to roll out in 2013 or 2014.

The “new” ICBC will also include a new, streamlined claims system that will allow customers the option of processing their claims in person, on the phone or online.

“There will be less paperwork, fewer processes,” Jan Vrem said. “They won’t have to go back to ICBC two or three times to deal with their claim. Eventually, our customers will be able to track the process of their claims as they go through the system, much the same way you can track a FedEx package.”

The new claims system is expected to go online in the third quarter of 2012, Jan Vrem said.

ICBC’s workforce will be reduced by about 350 jobs, including 70 management positions, over the next three years due to normal departures, including retirement and voluntary turnover. These positions will not be filled, due to “new technologies and systems,” according to an information bulletin posted on ICBC’s website.

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Speeders+could+face+insurance+increase/4728883/story.html#ixzz1LRxI5wJT

[hk20000]

One common complaint was customers felt it wasn’t fair that good drivers paid the same rate as drivers with a history of collisions and traffic violations, Jan Vrem said.
what? Which part of the existing system makes good driver pay the same as drivers with "collision history"?? Does the risk premium not already made drivers with point deductions pay more?!

This is just more of an incentive for high speed evasion. If it's a permanent ding I'd run too.

[2damaxmr2]

...

[jackal]

this seems counter intuitive to me.
bad drivers = crashes
good drivers = no crashes
tickets = irrelevant
in a perfect world everyone would be able to drive 200km/h and there would be no accidents but because people suck at driving we limit speeds to reduce the likelyhood of collisions by the shitty drivers. and now they're just looking to snatch up cash from the good drivers. i've been driving for 10 years and i always drive over the limit and have had my fair share of speeding tickets. not enough to be suspended and no penalty point but also no accidents, so... now i would pay more? :speechless:

[e60m5]

pile of shit, just out to get more money...

[|<e|_]

Cool story bro! Looks like more people are gonna start disputing tickets.... Instead of waiting an avg year for the court date it's gonna take two or more!
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[Dragon-88]

Or you could just not get tickets.. Pretty easy..

[rJZx]

Or you could just not get tickets.. Pretty easy..

pretty easy if you drive a corolla :troll:

[MindBomber]

He said the driving record model will paint a more comprehensive picture of a driver’s history than the existing model.

If my rates increase on my 02 civic, currently over $4000 a year with moderate coverage and an accident 3 years ago, because I have a ticket also from 3 years ago I'm going to snap.

On the other hand, if it's no longer based on my vehicle and icbc realizes my car has 95hp and no one wants to steal it, and they lower my rates I'd be happy. I'm not optimistic.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[taylor192]

I don't understand how the driver risk premium doesn't already address this. You pay extra if you collect so many points.

What I don't like is that the discount maxes out at 40%. Good drivers in other provinces pay a fraction of what ICBC costs even with a 40% discount. My insurance was $700 more in BC vs Ontario for the same coverage and I have 8 years driving clean.

Instead of changing the system to punish bad drivers more, how about rewarding good drivers. I'd hate to have a 20 year clean record and only a 40% discount.

[dai3yuen]

For speeding tickets, you already pay more in the way of points, it's just not reflected on your insurance premiums.

From what I understand, the fine for points will be scrapped and everything will be added to your premiums....

[bloodmack]

For speeding tickets, you already pay more in the way of points, it's just not reflected on your insurance premiums.

From what I understand, the fine for points will be scrapped and everything will be added to your premiums....

How would suspensions/DPP work with out points?

[MindBomber]

How would suspensions/DPP work with out points?

That's simple, keep the points drop the monetary penalties.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[RevRav]

“We realized to be a successful insurance company, we have to be money-focused and money-based,” said Jan Vrem.

“We’re modernizing our company to milk as much money out of our customers as possible based on the paycheques we have to pay our senior management team each month.”

Fixed.

[Marco911]

What isn't fair is that a driver that drives 100K km a year pays the same insurance as a driver driving 20K km /yr.

If they wanted to scale insurance based on risk, they should take mileage into account rather than a safe driver who happens to be unlucky and get a couple of tickets.

[Vale46Rossi]

That's a load of shit



http://badgals-radio.com/wp-content/uploads/HLIC/b723ded892f67e052e7f50d2641aa717.jpg

[TheNewGirl]

What isn't fair is that a driver that drives 100K km a year pays the same insurance as a driver driving 20K km /yr.

If they wanted to scale insurance based on risk, they should take mileage into account rather than a safe driver who happens to be unlucky and get a couple of tickets.

THIS I agree with.

But I don't see how our current system doesn't already address everything else the way it is.

[TRDood]

What isn't fair is that a driver that drives 100K km a year pays the same insurance as a driver driving 20K km /yr.

If they wanted to scale insurance based on risk, they should take mileage into account rather than a safe driver who happens to be unlucky and get a couple of tickets.

They do. Some what.

Pleasure vs. 15 km or less to work/school vs. 15 km or more to work/school.

I agree with you though. More time spent on the road = exposure to risk.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[Lomac]

What isn't fair is that a driver that drives 100K km a year pays the same insurance as a driver driving 20K km /yr.

If they wanted to scale insurance based on risk, they should take mileage into account rather than a safe driver who happens to be unlucky and get a couple of tickets.

Time to unhook the odometer!
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[Nightwalker]

Well. This will be terrible.

This article was not the best way to start my day.

[Tegra_Devil]

They do. Some what.

Pleasure vs. 15 km or less to work/school vs. 15 km or more to work/school.

I agree with you though. More time spent on the road = exposure to risk.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

out of curiousity which of those 3 is the cheapest options?

[Qmx323]

pleasure

but not by a lot

[DHP 1]

time to purchase a radar detector everyone

[Timpo]

ok isn't this just another insurance premium?

the point system is essentially a insurance premium, but different name...so they're charging insurance premium twice?

[rageguy]

Thanks to this thread, I realized I am in the wrong rate class and paying too much. I'm in rate 002 but I should be in 003, because my work is less than 15km away! Time to change insurance and get a partial refund!
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[!LittleDragon]

I'm sure someone's gonna find loopholes

[taylor192]

They do. Some what.

Pleasure vs. 15 km or less to work/school vs. 15 km or more to work/school.

I agree with you though. More time spent on the road = exposure to risk.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

They also do rates by where you live. If you only drive 10K yet do mostly urban driving in Vancouver you're more likely to have an accident than someone doing mostly highway/rural driving in interior BC.

[Timpo]

What isn't fair is that a driver that drives 100K km a year pays the same insurance as a driver driving 20K km /yr.

If they wanted to scale insurance based on risk, they should take mileage into account rather than a safe driver who happens to be unlucky and get a couple of tickets.

the rule or law will NEVER make sense perfectly...they're made by human, there always will be some flaw.

[bloodmack]

honestly we need a privatized system for car insurance so we can actually have competitive rates. ICBC is a worst then the telecom companies we have..

[Timpo]

yea ICBC dominates BC so they can do whatever they want no matter how unreasonable their decisions are

is there's a law? only ICBC can be the car insurance company?

[BaoTurbo]

time to purchase a radar detector everyone

Maybe lol

[quasi]

This would be fine if they lowered the rates for those with no tickets but that isn't going to happen.

[g_spyder91]

This would be fine if they lowered the rates for those with no tickets but that isn't going to happen.

Exactly, they're not going to lower the rates for "good drivers" they're just going to raise the rates for the bad ones, so it looks like good drivers are getting a discount. Just like everything this "non-profit" organization does this is just another cash grab so the execs. can make HUGE bonuses like every other year. In my eyes it's an EPIC:failed:

[hotjoint]

Instead of changing the system to punish bad drivers more, how about rewarding good drivers. I'd hate to have a 20 year clean record and only a 40% discount.

This is what I've been saying forever. There should be free insurance or a heavy discount if you've had a clean record. There should be no cap on the discount if been driving 20 years with no accidents, speeding tickets etc... I'm somewhere close to 14 years with no accidents.

[taylor192]

honestly we need a privatized system for car insurance so we can actually have competitive rates. ICBC is a worst then the telecom companies we have..

What what you wish for. While a private system may reward good drivers - it absolutely punishes bad drivers or potentially risky drivers. As young males we'd be very punished by the private system since our demographic is at higher risk.

I find the ICBC system very fair with how they handle the discount level. If you have an accident you know exactly how much you'll drop. With private insurance you're never sure - even companies with "accident forgiveness" have so many loopholes they could deny you for. Worse, if you do have an accident it becomes nearly impossible to switch insurers - they will all want a premium for you to switch with a recent bad driving record - so your insurance company can jack the rates sky high and you're stuck.

[Volvo-brickster]

honestly we need a privatized system for car insurance so we can actually have competitive rates. ICBC is a worst then the telecom companies we have..

If you are a 62 year old man with a clean driving record it is good to have.

Take a look at what young males pay for insurance back east in Ontario...you will be embracing ICBC when you compare their rates

[Meowjin]

i got hit by drp. for 1 excessive speeding ticket, I paid 2k over a 3 year time period. Bullshit if you ask me.

[taylor192]

i got hit by drp. for 1 excessive speeding ticket, I paid 2k over a 3 year time period. Bullshit if you ask me.

You'd pay a lot more than that under a private system, and for a lot longer. Some things stay on your record for 6-10 years.

[CP.AR]

I wonder what mr. XTC604's insurance rate will be :troll:

[frozen]

^He's too fast to be caught, so no speeding ticket.

[TypeRNammer]

Escort and Valentine will be pleased to hear about this :troll:
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[MindBomber]

In theory privitization would lower rates, in practice our public system is infinitely supperior. There's a reason that even Gord the sword, who sold off crow corporations with great enthusiasm, kept icbc.

honestly we need a privatized system for car insurance so we can actually have competitive rates. ICBC is a worst then the telecom companies we have..
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[Dragon-88]

^He's too fast to be caught, so no speeding ticket.

Not if theres snow on the ground...

[optiblue]

government is getting poor :(

[Timpo]

government is getting poor :(
that's because the nation is getting poor due to shit like this

[metal]

http://www.mpi.mb.ca/english/newsroom/articles/2011/Mar31.html

Heres something that you'll never see ICBC do.

[CP.AR]

http://www.mpi.mb.ca/english/newsroom/articles/2011/Mar31.html

Heres something that you'll never see ICBC do.

if people in Richmond stop driving their lexuses /lexi? into shopping malls or car dealerships we will see this

[dai3yuen]

http://www.mpi.mb.ca/english/newsroom/articles/2011/Mar31.html

Heres something that you'll never see ICBC do.

This would only happen if BCUC tells ICBC to give a rebate to everyone and we know that will not happen because the Government will take the money for themselves.

http://www.ctvbc.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20100304/bc_icbc_surplus_100304/20100304?hub=BritishColumbia

Our rates should have been lowered but instead all the money went to the Government instead.

[Eff-1]

When I spoke with my broker a couple years ago, I believe he mentioned ICBC no longer charges different rates for >15km or <15kms. They still ask you the question, but the rates are the same. As long as you're commuting each day, those who drive more than 15 kms haven't statistically shown they are a higher risk that those who drive 15 kms or less.

There is still, however, a different rate class for pleasure use vs commuter use.

[Edison_Chen]

When I spoke with my broker a couple years ago, I believe he mentioned ICBC no longer charges different rates for >15km or <15kms. They still ask you the question, but the rates are the same. As long as you're commuting each day, those who drive more than 15 kms haven't statistically shown they are a higher risk that those who drive 15 kms or less.

There is still, however, a different rate class for pleasure use vs commuter use.

The premium to drive over 15kms is still more than under 15. Its usually not a big difference over a year. ~$40-$50 more a year.

Many years ago, the difference used to be a few dollars more.

[91LS-VTak]

At least there is no more photo radar....people would be livid if their insurance rates went up because they were driving "61" in a "50"

[snowball]

The premium to drive over 15kms is still more than under 15. Its usually not a big difference over a year. ~$40-$50 more a year.

Many years ago, the difference used to be a few dollars more.


^ they started cracking down on people who insured for "pleasure" use but drove it to school/work which is why there is a larger difference now.

[slammer111]

Isn't this essentially double jeopardy? They get you once, then again?

Normally I just pay my tickets, but this is seriously going to make me dispute (and chance it) if a $200 ticket really means $800 over 3 years or whatever.

And why don't they raise the limits on the highways around here either? wtf..

[TRDood]

Isn't this essentially double jeopardy? They get you once, then again?

Normally I just pay my tickets, but this is seriously going to make me dispute (and chance it) if a $200 ticket really means $800 over 3 years or whatever.

And why don't they raise the limits on the highways around here either? wtf..

I don't know what the right answer is about this speeding premium. Of course, different people will have their own opinion and there's a problem of "speeding" and actually getting "caught speeding". But:

1. People see the gov't as a whole, so we think that we are getting dinged double.
2. Within the gov't, there are so many different departments and companies. They each want to generate revenue. ICBC gets some, the cops get some, ministry of transportation get some.

Bu there's no way to change that. It is just departments within the gov't competing for different pockets of money and protecting their own interests.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[PiuYi]

this still makes my blood boil

ICBC purchased 2,108 Olympic tickets and 400 Paralympic tickets for a total cost of about $405,000, with 85 per cent going to brokers, collision repair shops, and suppliers, and the rest to staff to host business partners.

ICBC said its tickets were bought using funding from the sale of optional insurance coverage, and no funds from the sale of basic insurance were used.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/09/22/bc-hydro-olympic-tickets-lotto-icbc.html

[Timpo]

“We’re modernizing our company to better serve them based on the feedback we’re getting.”

One common complaint was customers felt it wasn’t fair that good drivers paid the same rate as drivers with a history of collisions and traffic violations, Jan Vrem said.

ok so...customers felt it wasn't fair? how many customers?
did they actually ask all the customers who bought ther insurance?
they certainly didn't ask me.

I think ICBC is just picking only very few customers feedback who would favour their revenue.

If 90% of customer said that ICBC should be charging speeding premium, then I don't have a problem with it...but who are those "customers"?? like 1 or 2% of people?

[Meowjin]

who do i write to to complain about ICBC

[Timpo]

who do i write to to complain about ICBC

don't bother

ICBC will tell you that they're doing this only for safety reason, not for extra several hundred million $ revenue that they're getting.
Also, they get numerous complaints about pretty much everything so it's not likely they would have a time to sit down and talk to you about this.

what you can do is to write this down to other forums in BC, car related or not...or talk to media about it? So that people are aware at least? I dunno.

[Death2Theft]

Wonder whatever happened to that idea where icbc was gonna allow dual insurance where you could insure a high mpg car for daily commute and pay a lil extra to use a truck when you needed.

[Timpo]

Wonder whatever happened to that idea where icbc was gonna allow dual insurance where you could insure a high mpg car for daily commute and pay a lil extra to use a truck when you needed.
if it's not gonna be profitable to them, they won't do it...it's all about money.

why did they decide to raise the insurance rate for people who got speed tickets? instead of lowering the insurance rate for people who didn't get any speeding tickets?

[Marco911]

ok so...customers felt it wasn't fair? how many customers?
did they actually ask all the customers who bought ther insurance?
they certainly didn't ask me.

I think ICBC is just picking only very few customers feedback who would favour their revenue.

If 90% of customer said that ICBC should be charging speeding premium, then I don't have a problem with it...but who are those "customers"?? like 1 or 2% of people?

The only customers they asked was management at ICBC who drive ICBC insured cars.

[Marco911]

Wonder whatever happened to that idea where icbc was gonna allow dual insurance where you could insure a high mpg car for daily commute and pay a lil extra to use a truck when you needed.

It's called a Temporary Operating Permit (TOP). Look into it.

[Death2Theft]

Thats a pain in the ass having to go to an insurance place everytime you want to use it.

[bcrdukes]

who do i write to to complain about ICBC

Your MLA.

[dai3yuen]

if it's not gonna be profitable to them, they won't do it...it's all about money.

why did they decide to raise the insurance rate for people who got speed tickets? instead of lowering the insurance rate for people who didn't get any speeding tickets?

From what I understand, drivers with no tickets will see a reduction in their premiums, while drivers with tickets will see an increase.

[originalhypa]

ok so...customers felt it wasn't fair? how many customers?

did they actually ask all the customers who bought ther insurance?
they certainly didn't ask me.

I'm sure it's the same group who told Shaw and Telus that they support billed bandwidth tiering.

:fullofwin:

[TheNewGirl]

On the radio this morning they were explaining that this would mean a rate increase for about 30% of drivers who had multiple tickets and collisions. Mean while many drivers would stay about the same but the drivers with the longer, cleanest driving records would also see a rate decrease (but they couldn't give a percentage of drivers that would, or what sort of decrease that would mean).

If this is the case. I'm not so against it (though I'm also totally biased given I've never had a ticket or been in an accident I caused and I admit that).

That said... doesn't out insurance system already so this? Like my sister was found at fault in an accident and she lost her entire discount. She's going to be paying for that accident for like the next 10 years that it takes her to max out again.

If they simply used a threshold of points on your license to remove your "good driver discount" wouldn't that have the same effect?

[toyota86]

I'm against any kind of fee/premium/ticket/whatever increase but if there is no way to change what is inevitably going to come, here is a different way of thinking about it.

Just don't get caught. It's like doing preventative maintenance instead of having to fix something after it breaks. ICBC is banking on the fact that people wouldn't change their driving habits after the new increases. I'm not saying don't speed or don't have fun. I'm advocating changing your habits or your car so you lower you chances of getting caught.

Think about it. If less people get caught, every one of them lose revenues. All other cash grab government departments will blame ICBC for their losses.

Be better/smarter drivers. Learn the locations of common speed traps/cameras/police presence. Learn what unmarked cars the law have in their fleet. Become friends with people in law enforcement and people in ICBC. Learn how the system works and find loop holes. Know the law and what your rights are. Common sense goes a long way as well.

You could also be on the offensive. Detectors and jammers are cheap compared to an impound. The new hotness seems to be real time gps tracking of speed traps. Police scanners are nice to have. Never be the first 3-4 cars in a pack of cars. Radios are a must when cruising in a pack. Disable DRL, get rid of the fart can, get rid of very distinguishing features on your car, maintain good ride height so you can bust a U-turn or hop a curb without destroying your car. Simple easy stuff. I'm sure you guys know more.

I've given up hope with doing away with the 40+ and the ICBC rate increases. If you can't change others change yourself and adapt.

[Death2Theft]

Solid rubber tires awd and retracting plates.Can't give you a ticket if they can't stop u.

[Timpo]

From what I understand, drivers with no tickets will see a reduction in their premiums, while drivers with tickets will see an increase.

I'm sure ICBC has exectives with MBA and years of experience making money. I'm certain that they have done their research and projected all the potential income by making this new rule.

The reduction in the premium would be nothing compare to how much extra revenue they're getting. I'm sure ICBC has figured all that out.

Realistically, they would NOT make this new rule if it wasn't going to increase the revenue.
They might make themselves look like they're doing something good for the community, but they're not.

[RiceIntegraRS]

I see our max discount going from 43% -> 45%

I wouldnt really have a problem with this if say u lose 5% for an excessive speeding ticket but for just speeding? I just looked out my work window and saw like literally 20 cars speeding as i type this msg
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[Timpo]

I see our max discount going from 43% -> 45%

I wouldnt really have a problem with this if say u lose 5% for an excessive speeding ticket but for just speeding? I just looked out my work window and saw like literally 20 cars speeding as i type this msg
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

^this.

as you just saw from work, you can easily imagine how much millions of $$$ ICBC are going to make by this new rule.

[falcon]

On the radio this morning they were explaining that this would mean a rate increase for about 30% of drivers who had multiple tickets and collisions. Mean while many drivers would stay about the same but the drivers with the longer, cleanest driving records would also see a rate decrease (but they couldn't give a percentage of drivers that would, or what sort of decrease that would mean).

If this is the case. I'm not so against it (though I'm also totally biased given I've never had a ticket or been in an accident I caused and I admit that).

That said... doesn't out insurance system already so this? Like my sister was found at fault in an accident and she lost her entire discount. She's going to be paying for that accident for like the next 10 years that it takes her to max out again.

If they simply used a threshold of points on your license to remove your "good driver discount" wouldn't that have the same effect?

Exactly. This thread is full of garbage. My dad works at ICBC H/O in N. Van and is involved with re-designing the system. When they go to this system, all the others will be GONE. There won't be a point premium AND this... Some of you really need to do some research. I don't really like ICBC much, and don't think that because my dad works there that I condone everything they do.. but it's about time they start thinking of working like a normal insurance company. This is the way it's done everywhere else other than socialist BC.

[quasi]

Exactly. This thread is full of garbage. My dad works at ICBC H/O in N. Van and is involved with re-designing the system. When they go to this system, all the others will be GONE. There won't be a point premium AND this... Some of you really need to do some research. I don't really like ICBC much, and don't think that because my dad works there that I condone everything they do.. but it's about time they start thinking of working like a normal insurance company. This is the way it's done everywhere else other than socialist BC.

We can only go on the information given. No where in that article originally posted does it say they are redoing the system and the point premium that's in place would be gone. If they do get rid of the point premium I don't think people would have a problem with it. Read the responses people were outraged because they felt they could possibly get dinged twice.

I don't have a problem for paying a higher rate because of tickets I would have an issue with paying a higher rate, plus a points premium on top of that.

[freakshow]

^ Additionally, there isn't much talk about how much of a reduction a safe driver will see. It wouldn't make me much happier if the penalties for dangerous drivers increased, and the benefit for safe drivers stayed the same, or improved by some negligible amount.

[dai3yuen]

According to the Vancouver Sun article, someone from ICBC stated that good drivers will see a reduction in premiums by about 10%.

Also, the amount of extra money from the bad drivers they will be getting offsets the money that they are not receiving from the good drivers...at least that's what I read into it.

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Proposed+ICBC+rules+mean+third+drivers+would+face+ higher+rates/4761128/story.html


However, Cindy Brown, ICBC vice-president of communications, said later the average saving for someone with a clean record would be about 10 per cent.

She also said ICBC will collect the same amount of money under the new program, with the savings for some drivers matching the increases for others.

ICBC is still deciding what offences would spark an increase in premiums, but Schubert said non-driving-related infractions like a broken tail light are not expected to be included.

Don't forget that this is not written in stone yet. This still has to get past the BCUC (BC Utilities Commission) who regulate the rates that ICBC sets. (Then again, the BCUC is pretty much Govt appointed...*sigh*)

Apparently the Govt doesn't know what's going on at ICBC as the Solicitor-General is now 'expressing concern'....

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/solicitor+general+questions+ICBC+over+tough+approa ch/4766613/story.html

[Timpo]

ok, we all know this...this is nothing but another cash grab for ICBC

I do not have a problem with insurance premiums for actual high risk drivers, such as....drinking and driving, wreckless driving, street racing, multiple violations, accidents or excessive speeding, and so on.

However, we all know what ICBC is doing is just plain stupid and needs to be stop.

getting 1 speeding ticket is nothing...it doesn't make him/her a high risk driver...a lot of officers would give out speeding ticket if you're going 60km/h in 50 zone.

I'm not saying going a little over the speed limit is okay or anything, however, the person who got a speeding ticket is already being penalized by the violation ticket and it will stay on the driving record...why would he/she needs another 3 years of insurance premium for going 60km/h in 50km/h zone?

[porsche77]

Originally Posted by Vancouver Sun
“We realized to be a successful insurance company, we have to be money-focused and money-based,” said Jan Vrem.

“We’re modernizing our company to milk as much money out of our customers as possible based on the paycheques we have to pay our senior management team each month.”
-Quoted by RevRAv

:D
i like it, its exactly what they do! i'm sick and tired of ICBC!! Insurance is a huge scam on its own, and then add ICBC to top it off!!

[Marco911]

ICBC is applying this rule retroactively. That means if you get a speeding ticket within the 3 year time frame before the regulation comes into effect, they will penalize you with higher rates. Is that even legal?

[Timpo]

yeah they should just be honest and tell people they're only interested in making money...

what really bugs me is that they always try to lie and explain stuff as if they actually care about traffic safety or something...it's just hypocrite and BS.

[quasi]

ICBC is applying this rule retroactively. That means if you get a speeding ticket within the 3 year time frame before the regulation comes into effect, they will penalize you with higher rates. Is that even legal?

They did the samething when they changed the way discounts were done years back. I think it falls under they can do whatever they want and if you don't like it.......oh wait there is no competition, deal with it. :)

[Timpo]

so who made this decision that ICBC can dominate the car insurance market in BC?

[quasi]

so who made this decision that ICBC can dominate the car insurance market in BC?

The provincial Govt. when they brought it in and made it a Prov. Crown corporation. The idea behind it isn't terrible, the execution and having a monopoly on basic insurance can be problem though. Competition is good, without it you can pretty much do whatever you want especially when you're esentially an arm of the Government.

[hk20000]

Well, it's useless to whine and bitch. Time for a radar detector/jammer groupbuy.

[originalhypa]

Well, it's useless to whine and bitch. Time for a radar detector/jammer groupbuy.

What do you recommend?
Valentine 1, STi Driver, 9500ix, or the RX65?

Jammers are getting a bit crazy. But I'm not against buying a $500 detector now, since the cost of the fines are outweighing the cost of a detector immensely.

[freakshow]

What do you recommend?
Valentine 1, STi Driver, 9500ix, or the RX65?

Jammers are getting a bit crazy. But I'm not against buying a $500 detector now, since the cost of the fines are outweighing the cost of a detector immensely.
I did a little bit of research on this, seems to be really split between the V1 and 9500ix. I'm probably gonna pick up a 9500ix soon based on it's ability to mark known spots for false-positives.
The V1 provides the directional arrows, but I read that: a) when you hear it chirp, you slow down regardless, and b) if it gives more false-positives than the 9500ix, you'll trust it less anyways.

[DHP 1]

^


Im on the hunt for a decent radar detector too as well, however i narrowed it down to passport 9500ix or redline. V1 IMO is useless, it doesnt have the furthest range like redline, the arrows are overated .

I contacted passport today, apparently 9500ix detects roughly 2 miles away. While redline is slightly newer detects 3 miles away. However these are given under a perfect world when they did these test.

here are some test results

http://www.speedzones.com/Site_6/radar_reception.html


IMO if you do a lot of city driving mix with hwy, get the passport 9500ix.


IF you travel on hwy most of the time get the redline since it has the furthest range.


However having said that, our city is NOT that big, unlike LA/NY. Therefore IMO i suggest get the 9500ix if you dont want your radar detector triping every couple seconds due to automatic doors

:fullofwin:

[originalhypa]

The 9500ix is a nice unit, but at the last Ferrari/Lambo meet, most of the guys there ran the V1. The arrows do help in a situation where the bogey could be coming from multiple directions. That said, the patent on the arrows must be running out soon.

Fuckit, I just ordered a 9500ix.
Yay me!

[DHP 1]

Did you consider the redline?


well, i guess its too late now since you ordered the 9500ix


:fullofwin:

[TRDood]

Here's some things that the public doesn't understand.

This new proposal should only apply to basic insurance. (your $800-$1000 a year) Yes, ICBC is a monopoly in this department but optional insurance is a competitive market. You can buy optional insurance through other companies.

However, people always combine/think that the only place to buy insurance is from ICBC, not true.

Now with this proposal thing in place, just think about the consequences of speeding. The penalties have just got heavier. I hope this model doesn't apply to window tinting, lower cars, exhausts, etc.

Now thinking about it, I can just speed all the fuck I want in the states, ICBC has no jurisdiction there. :D

[Mancini]

:D
i like it, its exactly what they do! i'm sick and tired of ICBC!! Insurance is a huge scam on its own, and then add ICBC to top it off!!

Then all you need to buy from ICBC is the minimum $200,000 compulsory coverage. It's relatively inexpensive. No extra 3rd party liability, no collision coverage, no comprehensive.

And yet, if you own a car, I'd be willing to bet that you purchase more than the compulsory coverage. And if you own property I'd also be willing to bet that you insure that, too.

I don't have a problem with people disliking ICBC or, as in your case, disliking insurance entirely. Fair enough. But typically, people with this opinion hypocritically carry as much insurance coverage as everyone else. Hopefully, you're different.

[TheNewGirl]

You can also, if you have a good driving record, get your compulsory coverage from ICBC and go to a private insurer for all your further coverage.

I know we bitch about ICBC a lot but it IS better than a lot of the alternatives.

[quasi]

You can also, if you have a good driving record, get your compulsory coverage from ICBC and go to a private insurer for all your further coverage.

I know we bitch about ICBC a lot but it IS better than a lot of the alternatives.

No doubt for a motorcycle I save over 30% and the bike is insured through the winter for fire and theft which I'd normally have to pay extra for.

[falcon]

^ Additionally, there isn't much talk about how much of a reduction a safe driver will see. It wouldn't make me much happier if the penalties for dangerous drivers increased, and the benefit for safe drivers stayed the same, or improved by some negligible amount.

That's because it's still in the early stages. Realistically, this won't be implemented for at least 1-2 years.

[Timpo]

You can also, if you have a good driving record, get your compulsory coverage from ICBC and go to a private insurer for all your further coverage.

I know we bitch about ICBC a lot but it IS better than a lot of the alternatives.

if ICBC really is better deal than other insurance out there, then BC should just allow private companies to enter BC markert, because customers would just keep buying ICBC if they're actually better.

[GG]

just ordered my 9500ix

woot

[TheNewGirl]

if ICBC really is better deal than other insurance out there, then BC should just allow private companies to enter BC markert, because customers would just keep buying ICBC if they're actually better.


You haven't been in provinces where you have private insurance though have you?

For example, I'm a less experienced driver (I only got my license 5 years ago), but on grounds of me being female and 30-35, I would probably pay substancially less (15-20%) on a private system than most of you guys who have had yours for 10 years but are still in your 20s.

Legalized discrimination. Isn't it fun?

As many people have stated though you can buy only your most basic from ICBC and get the rest privately, this is a very viable and widely available option. If you hate ICBC so much why aren't you doing that?

[melloman]

Private insurance is WAY better for people who are considered "good drivers"..

Lets compare our insurance to the US.. shall we?

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5291875-Let-s-talk-insurance..-What-do-you-guys-have-pay

And from that thread, don't forget everybodies driving a B5 A4.. ICBC considers a 2001 Audi B5 A4 Quattro, a "high quality, luxury sedan* which makes my rates go through the damn roof. You can see my post there about how much I pay..

[TheNewGirl]

Insurance coverage is different in the states because legal options are different in the states. If you hit some lady and she gets whip lash she can sue you instead of the insurance company, and personal liability limits are way lower while personal law suits are way higher.

Melloman, you should ask them what their liability covers? Also note, a lot of these people seem to ONLY be paying Liability, not collision, theft or comprehensive.

Like if you look at the posted chart, it's caped at 50K personal injury and 10K damage per accident... meaning if there was more then that (and in many cases there is) it would come out of your pocket. Most of us with ICBC are walking around with like 200K - 3 million dollar liability coverage on the other hand.

[originalhypa]

Did you consider the redline?


well, i guess its too late now since you ordered the 9500ix


:fullofwin:

I did consider the Redline, as my brother had that one. It's a nice unit, and uber sensitive, but his speaker failed in the first two weeks, and that soured me a bit.

They refused to ship my 9500ix across the border, as it's a restricted zone. So it's really not too late.
:lol

[GG]

^

wtf? that shitty? passport does honor one year warranty tho

[Captain Bondo]

I agree with the thought of buying a radar detector, and disputing pretty much any ticket you get. The potential costs associated are disproportionate to the crime - 20 over on a clear sunny day should not have a potential penalty north of $800. Anyone in their right mind would fight that.

[7seven]

VANCOUVER (NEWS1130) - ICBC is backing away from a controversial proposal which would've seen things like a single speeding ticket factored into insurances rates.
The move follows a promised meeting with Solicitor General Shirley Bond. She doesn't mind the idea, but has asked ICBC to rethink the options.
"While the principals of a rate structure that differentiates between good drivers and bad drivers is worth considering, I've directed ICBC to go back to the drawing board and rethink the options," said Bond. "My job is to make sure that I'm looking after what's best for BC families."
ICBC will now undertake a province-wide consultation to get your opinion. "We didn't do a good enough job of communicating with the public or with the government about the changes we were considering, and we apologize for the concern this caused," says ICBC President and CEO Jon Schubert.
Meantime, NDP Finance critic Bruce Ralston says the move probably means the Liberals don't want to deal with higher insurance rates heading into a provincial election.
"If there is some sort of opposition to these kinds of measures, at this point she is prepared to listen. But given the record of the BC Liberals I don't think they'll listen in the long term, that's for sure."
When the plan was brought up in the Legislature last week, Ralston called on the government to scrap it immediately.

http://www.news1130.com/news/local/article/227124--icbc-retracts-rate-restructuring-proposal

[quasi]

http://www.news1130.com/news/local/article/227124--icbc-retracts-rate-restructuring-proposal

LOL, where is Falcon who got on his high horse and called most people in this thread an idiot and suggest we do some research. It looks like it's ICBC that failed, there CEO even says they didn't do a good job communicating with the public.

[TheNewGirl]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2011/05/16/bc-icbc-rate-hikes.html?ref=rss

ICBC has withdrawn their proposal to add rate hikes for speeders.


ICBC withdraws controversial speeding ticket rate hikes


ICBC CEO and president Jon Schubert has been told to rethink a controversial proposal to hike the rates of drivers who get a single traffic ticket. ICBC CEO and president Jon Schubert has been told to rethink a controversial proposal to hike the rates of drivers who get a single traffic ticket. (CBC)

The Insurance Corporation of British Columbia has withdrawn its controversial proposal to hike the insurance rates of drivers who get a speeding ticket or other moving violations.

According to a statement issued by the Crown corporation on Monday morning, the move follows a meeting with the Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General Shirley Bond, who told ICBC to ensure it applies a test of, "being reasonable - and a hike in premiums for a single speeding ticket is not reasonable."

"While the principals of a rate structure that differentiates between good drivers and bad drivers is worth considering, I've directed ICBC to go back to the drawing board and rethink the options," Bond was quoted in the statement.

ICBC's president and CEO Jon Schubert apologized for fumbling the proposal in the statement.

"We didn't do a good enough job of communicating with the public or with government about the changes we were considering, and we apologize for the concern this caused," said Schubert.
Proposal hit immediate opposition

The provincially-owned insurance company said Wednesday it plans to overhaul its rate structure to reward safe drivers and punish those with traffic violations. The penalties would cover all moving violations, including unsafe passing, following too close, and running a red light.

But the announcement immediately ran into opposition from both sides of the legislature with both the government and the opposition calling for ICBC to rethink the proposal.

ICBC says it will now undertake a provincewide consultation and rethink the proposal.

"We're going to take a step back and rethink the options for a reasonable way to share risk, and we'll do a much better job of gathering public input."

Details on where and how customers can provide feedback will be announced in the coming weeks.

"It is really important for us to get this right for our customers," said Schubert. "I want to assure customers that we will not recommend any changes without much broader consultation."

[TRDood]

That was short lived.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[red_2]

So does this mean they are taking away the premium for speeders that just got 1 ticket right?

[TheNewGirl]

It means they've abandoned that plan and are looking for a new one.

Probably because too many MLAs have speeding tickets so they were all like "Bad ICBC! Bad!"

Since that is the ONLY reason I can imagine the Liberals and NDP agreeing on anything.

[TRDood]

It means they've abandoned that plan and are looking for a new one.

Probably because too many MLAs have speeding tickets so they were all like "Bad ICBC! Bad!"

Since that is the ONLY reason I can imagine the Liberals and NDP agreeing on anything.

Or to make it simpler, increase rates overall.

[Edison_Chen]

I can probably see them, being more lenient on the number of ticket a person gets before they jack up the premium.

[Captain Bondo]

Problem is, with the driver risk premium BS, you basically already pay higher premiums, given that a single excessive speed ticket costs $320 every year for 3 years.:failed: