Huge RCMP Roadcheck

User avatar
Poindexter
Guru
Posts: 6265
Joined: May 26th, 2008, 11:44 am

Re: Huge RCMP Roadcheck

Post by Poindexter »

The RCMP doesn't have auto insurance, so if they're at fault you have to sue them directly. Because they work for Her Majesty, all our court documents on the injury claim listed us against her majesty the queen. They had three high priced lawyers and made it very clear if we lost we would be the ones paying thier wages and costs. A bit unsavory given we were in university at the time and broke. Our lawyer was weary to to carry it further even though it was a pretty cut and dry case (we were driving straight through an intersection, they turned left directly into us) Officer driving said it was entirely his fault. Coincidentally they lost all witness accounts and contact numbers of the witnesses. One witness tried to give us his business card but the police took it saying we'd get a copy of all names and accounts. Like I said, all that went missing and it came down to our word against thiers and they were now claiming we had our signal light on to turn right, which we didn't. Our lawyer informed us that there were precedents in cases where we could receive up to 70% of the blame if it went to court. At his advice we accepted a small settlement and walked away with bad necks and a new found distrust for our RCMP.
Remember: Humans are 99% chimp.
jamapple
Übergod
Posts: 1552
Joined: Oct 1st, 2008, 10:00 pm

Re: Huge RCMP Roadcheck

Post by jamapple »

I'm sorry to hear that, Pondexter! That's aweful!

I now do know why Lake asked. Now, Lake will take this and spew the police, (as a whole with the same brush), rant. Just giving everyone on here the heads up....it's a coming!
twobits
Guru
Posts: 7964
Joined: Nov 25th, 2010, 8:44 am

Re: Huge RCMP Roadcheck

Post by twobits »

It's not just RCMP vehicles. No Federal vehicle's carry insurance. They are backed purely by the notion that the Crown is soluble and therefore able to pay so there is no need for an insurance premium. That goes for anything from Federal meat inspector in a Prius to a military Humvee.
In essence, the gov't is their own insurance underwriter because of assets and income stream. It's like saying "I am rich enough that I don't need to be bothered with buying insurance". Sweet deal. But who does that leave to pay the bill when the meat inspector had a liquid lunch and killed someone?
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
Donald G
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 20156
Joined: Jan 29th, 2008, 8:42 pm

Re: Huge RCMP Roadcheck

Post by Donald G »

Federal vhicles, inclding RCMP vehicles, do not carry PRIVATE insurance. Any liability is 100% insured by the Federal Government or Provincial Government in the event of a contract.

Why would the Federal Government spend extra money to insure with private incurance companies when the Government ability to pay is beyond question and certainly far in excess of what any insurance compa y would have acces to ??

People want the Government to go out and spend thousands of dollars per vehicle when it is in no way needed ??

Am I missing something here ??
jamapple
Übergod
Posts: 1552
Joined: Oct 1st, 2008, 10:00 pm

Re: Huge RCMP Roadcheck

Post by jamapple »

I think what you're missing is that it's not a case of no insurance, it's a case of their insurance is covered by the endless bank account of the prov/federal governments.
I wouldn't put insurance on either if I knew the general population will pay for any damages caused by the use of a government vehicle.
I didn't know they never carried insurance, and don't like that fact, ( but I probably wouldn't like the tax increase to pay for the 50,000 cop/and government vehicles) either.
twobits
Guru
Posts: 7964
Joined: Nov 25th, 2010, 8:44 am

Re: Huge RCMP Roadcheck

Post by twobits »

Donald G wrote:Federal vhicles, inclding RCMP vehicles, do not carry PRIVATE insurance. Any liability is 100% insured by the Federal Government or Provincial Government in the event of a contract.

Why would the Federal Government spend extra money to insure with private incurance companies when the Government ability to pay is beyond question and certainly far in excess of what any insurance compa y would have acces to ??

People want the Government to go out and spend thousands of dollars per vehicle when it is in no way needed ??

Am I missing something here ??


No you are not missing anything here really. It is a discussion topic more than anything. I have to wonder, and I suppose the suspicious side of me as far as gov't operations and efficiency goes......is it really cost efficient for our gov't to be the underwriter for all of the risk they assume with thousands of vehicles and thousands of non scrutinized drivers?
More specifically, should the meat inspector in my previous post, be given a carte blanche to drive a non insured gov't vehicle if say he/she had two impaired's in the last 10 years and 9 points on their licence? They still legally have their licence but an independent underwriter would have flagged them as a high risk operator.
So what it really comes down to in my mind Donald, would the feds (and the taxpayer) be better off if they just bought insurance rather than say, "we can afford any claim we are responsible for".
What we need to answer that question is numbers that I don't think the feds are going to easily make available. The question would be....."what did we pay out in accident and liability claims attributed to our Federal Vehicle fleet cost the taxpayer vs the cost of private insurance"? And keep in mind that the private insurers might request that no one with a past DUI or more than 5 points on their licence be disallowed from driving a gov't fleet vehicle.
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
jamapple
Übergod
Posts: 1552
Joined: Oct 1st, 2008, 10:00 pm

Re: Huge RCMP Roadcheck

Post by jamapple »

Well, there you go. That makes sence. With private insurance, who knows how many government employees couldn't even drive a government vehicle. If drivers with excessive points are flagged, they can easily be hidden by this insurance scheme.
Donald G
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 20156
Joined: Jan 29th, 2008, 8:42 pm

Re: Huge RCMP Roadcheck

Post by Donald G »

Good point but given that Private Insurance would only cover the vehicles under an "X" classification ... multiple drivers and multiple areas ... which is the highest risk category ... I do not see how Private Insurance could possibly compete. And would the government not still have to pay out if they were at fault and the private insurance did not pay out "because of some clause" in the insurance contract.

I think insurance plus profit (or why do it) will always be higher than insurance alone.
Donald G
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 20156
Joined: Jan 29th, 2008, 8:42 pm

Re: Huge RCMP Roadcheck

Post by Donald G »

To jamapple ...

I can't see Human Rights permitting an insurance company to impose a lifetime employment driving ban on a a "Government" employee for a past conviction for impaired driving. An excuse for higher premiums (if there is a category higher than "X") perhaps. Either way the Government would still have to pay up even if the insurance compand did not.
jamapple
Übergod
Posts: 1552
Joined: Oct 1st, 2008, 10:00 pm

Re: Huge RCMP Roadcheck

Post by jamapple »

Donald G wrote:To jamapple ...

I can't see Human Rights permitting an insurance company to impose a lifetime employment driving ban on a a "Government" employee for a past conviction for impaired driving. An excuse for higher premiums (if there is a category higher than "X") perhaps. Either way the Government would still have to pay up even if the insurance compand did not.



They don't have to. It's not the insurance companies position, it's the governments to make sure that the people they have driving their vehicles are not convicted of various crimes that do not entitle them to be driving any vehicle.
Donald G
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 20156
Joined: Jan 29th, 2008, 8:42 pm

Re: Huge RCMP Roadcheck

Post by Donald G »

To jamapple ...

I take it that you are talking about people who are PRESENTLY under a driving suspension. I am talking about those who have served their suspension.
User avatar
maryjane48
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 17124
Joined: May 28th, 2010, 7:58 pm

Re: Huge RCMP Roadcheck

Post by maryjane48 »

jamapple wrote:I'm sorry to hear that, Pondexter! That's aweful!

I now do know why Lake asked. Now, Lake will take this and spew the police, (as a whole with the same brush), rant. Just giving everyone on here the heads up....it's a coming!

lol oh really , arent we the amazing kreskin today .
jamapple
Übergod
Posts: 1552
Joined: Oct 1st, 2008, 10:00 pm

Re: Huge RCMP Roadcheck

Post by jamapple »

It's called past history, but you skew history, so we'll just leave it at that.
User avatar
maryjane48
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 17124
Joined: May 28th, 2010, 7:58 pm

Re: Huge RCMP Roadcheck

Post by maryjane48 »

lol lets see direct post where i skewed history ?
twobits
Guru
Posts: 7964
Joined: Nov 25th, 2010, 8:44 am

Re: Huge RCMP Roadcheck

Post by twobits »

lakevixen wrote:lol lets see direct post where i skewed history ?


It is a fruitless endeavor because we can't access the version of history that exists in your mind and believe to be true.
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.

Return to “North Okanagan”