Get tickets, pay ICBC more..

[jimmy4321]

I've had insurance now in Calgary, Ottawa, Halifax and BC in a couple cities. Each time coming back to BC with same vehicle(just a year older) I got by ICBC with a clean record.
Once almost 50%, the rest of the times between 300-500 dollars, people need to wake up. This all within a dozen years.

[casey60]

Cannot believe this government is keeping ICBC. My suggestion is simple if they want to keep ICBC. That is, allow private insurance to come in. ICBC can stay as an insurance ONLY company. Then they can compete. Bad drivers should be paying more. I am sick and tired of paying for bad drivers. Ever noticed how many N drivers are left lane speeders? Ever noticed some truckers speeding with their loaded rigs? Noticed how many drivers are using their cellphones? Texting in front of a red traffic light? The whole system can be much easier. Hefty fines to start. European hiways and freeways, Lots of cameras. You speed and within couple of days ticket in your mailbox. They don't care who the driver is The owner of the vehicle is the responsible party. Not here in BC for whatever reason.

[jimmy4321]

I get what you're saying but I don't think it's fair for private companies to go head to head with a publicly funded one. Not to mention the shenanigans that BC Gov would be involved with in rigging the system in their favour. As long as ICBC stands a chance to make a buck, we'll still get screwed.

[my5cents]

I get what you're saying but I don't think it's fair for private companies to go head to head with a publicly funded one. Not to mention the shenanigans that BC Gov would be involved with in rigging the system in their favour. As long as ICBC stands a chance to make a buck, we'll still get screwed.

If you talk to anyone in the auto insurance business you'd find that the least profitable, or perhaps "most loss prone" portion of auto insurance is the first $200,000 Public Liability insurance.

When a negligent driver hit's your vehicle, that's the coverage that fixes or replaces your vehicle and if there are serious injuries pays you for pain and suffering. As we've seen the pain and suffering part, for minor collisions is what is really taking a financial toll on auto insurance companies all over.

In most provinces except BC, until this September, there is legislation that has created a threshold on payouts for minor claims because those types of claims have drastically inflated auto insurance payouts.

The profitable portion of auto insurance is the liability coverage in excess of the $200,000 amount and the own damage coverage.

You say that it wouldn't be fair for private auto insurance companies to go head to head with ICBC, being a "publicly funded" insurance company.

For starters, ICBC is "funded" by the motorists in BC, just like a private insurance company would be funded. There are no tax dollars given to or taken by ICBC, in fact in the recent past it has been the opposite.

It's all well and good for people to spout off the "my brother in law in Alberta only pays...…." or, "I used to live in … and I only paid....."

In my experience when these "facts" are examined comparing apples to apples, there is little or no difference in the rates.

In speaking with my brother in law yesterday, who is in the auto insurance business in Alberta, he says the number of auto insurance claims is down drastically in Alberta, he likens the reason to the fact that $1000 or ever $2000 deductible is the norm, so many who ding their own vehicles fix them, themselves.

In BC $300 or $500 deductible is standard for most. In my case my comprehensive coverage, which includes glass is $300 deductible and for a windshield it is $200.

In Alberta comprehensive coverage does not include glass, to have glass covered requires an additional rider on the policy.

Getting back to the loosing/risky portion of auto insurance for insurance companies, the first $200,000 liability coverage. It would seem if that is the portion of insurance that is the least desirable for an auto insurance company to sell, in BC the fact the private companies only sell everything other than that, should give them an advantage.

Before anyone quotes the extreme low "great" rates others have in other provinces, one has to make sure they are comparing the same, limits, deductibles, coverage, no fault amounts.

[Sparki55]

Before anyone quotes the extreme low "great" rates others have in other provinces, one has to make sure they are comparing the same, limits, deductibles, coverage, no fault amounts.

In 2017, drivers in each of the provinces listed below paid the following premiums:

British Columbia ($1,680)
Ontario ($1,445)
Alberta ($1,251)
Newfoundland and Labrador ($1,132)
Manitoba ($1,080)
Saskatchewan ($936)
Nova Scotia ($842)
New Brunswick ($819)
Prince Edward Island ($796)
Quebec ($661)
Sutherland said in the IBC release that opening B.C.’s auto insurance marketplace to competition would save drivers up to $325 annually.

https://www.canadianunderwriter.ca/earnings-ratings/canadian-drivers-pay-least-auto-insurance-1004134702/
https://www.arcinsurance.ca/blog/average-car-insurance-rates-across-canadian-provinces/

According to the report, drivers in B.C. are estimated to pay between 13 per cent and 60 per cent more than they would in Alberta for comparable coverage.

Premiums for recreational vehicles are estimated to be up to three times higher in B.C. than Alberta and motorcycle premiums are an estimated 11 times higher.

According to ICBC, many Albertans have been told by private insurers that they are too great of a risk and are being denied coverage.

^^^ That is awesome. Gets the really bad drivers off the road for being too big of a problem.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-drivers-paying-up-to-60-more-for-vehicle-insurance-than-albertans-says-new-report-1.5065808

We pay more. Show some numbers if you'd like me to believe otherwise.

[my5cents]

The survey talks about comparable "averages" BUT, how can you compare AB, SK, QK, ON that have caps on liability payments according to injury severity, when BC doesn't.

Not saying that BC shouldn't have that system, but the Liberals were told, and chose to ignore the recommendation and they chose to hide that portion of the report that they commissioned. (push back from the lawyers [Trial Lawyers Assn])

The NDP are implementing the system in September. An insurance company isn't something that can be turned around in months, there are claims that won't settle for years.

There are BIG differences in the coverage in these provinces.

If BC had mostly $1000 and $2000 deductibles, a limit on liability payments, less no fault benefits, glass coverage not automatic with comprehensive coverage, rates conditional on age, sex, marital status, credit history etc etc. you could then reliably compare the rates.

You can't compare a shack on a lot in Chilliwack to a 8000 sq ft mansion in Lumby (is there a 8000 sq ft mansion in Lumby ?) and say house prices are way less in Chilliwack. Again, apples to apples.

The two links provided... one is an association that advises private insurance companies the other is one. Another one to get dirt on government auto insurance that the media always quote is "The Insurance Bureau of Canada". Sounds like a federal department, but is a private company that sells it's services to private insurance. The more private companies the more income.

One area NOBODY compares is the cost of optional coverage in BC between private auto insurance and ICBC. It's very close.

My quotes for optional last year were : ($300 ded for collision, $300 ded comp except windshields $200 ded, $3 million liability) The private companies don't reduce the deductible for windshields it is $300.

Private 1 - $677 (this was a company I had my house, M/C and car with)
Private 2 - $449
ICBC - $469

Optional is where the profit for auto insurance companies is, so why isn't private as cheap as dirt compared to ICBC's optional coverage ? They are in FULL competition.

To those who continually say "well I have never had a claim and my rates keep going up". It's insurance, not a bank loan. We all share in the increased costs for claims. If we have a claim, we will have a larger share in those costs, but as claims cost go up premiums go up for everyone. Depending on the size of the claim, if we had a big one, we likely will never pay back the amount paid out on our behalf.

Insurance is something we don't want to ever use, unlike the TV commercials we hear saying "What's the sense in having insurance if they charge you more when you use it."

If we live in a community where a wild fire comes through burns 80% of the homes and ours is one of the lucky ones that doesn't burn, our property/fire insurance will go up, even though, YES we didn't have a claim.