TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Do tell, is this a bit ridiculous or am I crazy? (INSURANCE FUN)
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Do tell, is this a bit ridiculous or am I crazy? (INSURANCE FUN)

My parents recently renewed the insurance on their vehicles, and I'm insured with the same company.

The insurance company had me sign a goddamned waiver saying that I would not drive my mother's car, a Ford Mustang (piece of shit V6, but it's 5-spd at least).

I thought that was a bit over the top, but is this common practice? Also, fuck automotive insurance. Why is an '03 Mazda MX5 cheaper than my '88 New Yorker beater?

because you are most likely under 25,not married,no kids, live at home, and male.That and your salary can have effects on your premiums.

Re: Do tell, is this a bit ridiculous or am I crazy? (INSURANCE FUN)

quote:

Originally posted by VERTiG0 The insurance company had me sign a goddamned waiver saying that I would not drive my mother's car, a Ford Mustang (piece of shit V6, but it's 5-spd at least).

Same thing happened to my brother...

insurance companies are REALLY.

and no you're not crazy, and yes it is ridiculous!

Well, I'm insured on my dad's truck but he politely informed me that the only way I would ever be behind the wheel of it would be to drive his dead body to a funeral home or get his wine collection out of our burning house.


Just sounds like paperwork to cover their ass.

that is the gheyest thing ive ever heard...unless you have a bad record...

Re: Do tell, is this a bit ridiculous or am I crazy? (INSURANCE FUN)

quote:

Originally posted by VERTiG0 My parents recently renewed the insurance on their vehicles, and I'm insured with the same company. The insurance company had me sign a goddamned waiver saying that I would not drive my mother's car, a Ford Mustang (piece of shit V6, but it's 5-spd at least). I thought that was a bit over the top, but is this common practice? Also, fuck automotive insurance. Why is an '03 Mazda MX5 cheaper than my '88 New Yorker beater?

It's not rediculous and you're not crazy, you simply don't understand insurance.

Debate as you will the merits, or lack thereof, of the Ford Mustang but understand that statistically vehicles of it's ilk are more often involved in serious collisions due to speed or lack of driver attention then are other vehicles. This is compounded when you add a young, single, male driver who lives with his parents to the mix. Your demographic (note, insurance is based on large numbers not individuals in keeping with the founding principle of insurance "to spread the risk of the few amongst the many") is far more likely to be involved in serious at fault collisions then is any other. This risk becomes greater when driving a vehicle such as your mother's. In order to cover the risk of you driving your mother's vehicle her insurer would need to charge a substantially increased premium.

To prevent this increased premium your broker, or your mother, has recommended that you be excluded from coverage on this vehicle. This means that the insurance company does not owe you a defence from liability or your mother indemnification from physical damage if you are driving the automobile. The exclusion removes the risk you pose to the insurer. As a result, they do not need to charge an increased premium to cover the risk.

The waiver is necessary because the Ontario Automobile Owner's Policy (OAP1) is writen in such a way that any (licensed and qualified) driver of the vehicle is covered unless explicitly excluded. Years ago the insurer would have simply placed an endorsement on the policy excluding you as a driver. Unfortunately, the courts have since ruled that unless the insurer can prove the excluded driver "knew or ought to have known" that they were an excluded driver the endorsement is not enforcable. The easiest way for the insurer to prove this is to have you sign off on a waiver that acknowledges you are excluded from coverage under the policy.

This is not an uncommon practice at all, in fact, it is frequently employed.

As for the Mazda vs. the New Yorker question, I need more details to give an accurate answer. There could be a number of reasons.... age of driver, sex of driver, marital status, driver history, LPN (list price new), residence of driver, use of vehicle, average KM/year, coverage, optional endorsents, insurer's rate schedule (as controled by the Financial Services Commission of Ontario), etc.

I know it's a lot to read but I hope it helps clear things up a bit.

I'm so glad that I don't have to worry about insurance right now b/c my family has company cars. The horror stories I hear of insurance companies make me nervous to get a car of my own. They sound super gay.

Re: Do tell, is this a bit ridiculous or am I crazy? (INSURANCE FUN)

quote:

Originally posted by VERTiG0 I thought that was a bit over the top, but is this common practice?

Yes it is common practice. They are covering their ass as much to let you state that you know you're not insured on it.

quote:

Originally posted by VERTiG0 Why is an '03 Mazda MX5 cheaper than my '88 New Yorker beater?

Probably: Cost to rebuild MX5 < cost to rebuild New Yorker (or damage done by MX5 < damage done by New Yorker).

Re: Re: Do tell, is this a bit ridiculous or am I crazy? (INSURANCE FUN)

quote:

Originally posted by rabbitjoker Probably: Cost to rebuild MX5 < cost to rebuild New Yorker (or damage done by MX5 < damage done by New Yorker).

Not to mention that the mx5 is probably much safer, and the chance of serious injury if a collision is much less. I thought I was gonna have to bring my Insurance expertise here but some 1 wrote a pretty good long reply lol, Ive been working in insurance 3 years and managing an Insurance brokerage for about half a year.

Re: Re: Do tell, is this a bit ridiculous or am I crazy? (INSURANCE FUN)

quote:

Originally posted by rabbitjoker Probably: Cost to rebuild MX5 < cost to rebuild New Yorker (or damage done by MX5 < damage done by New Yorker).

True enough, I suppose. New old stock from a dealership sure as hell isn't cheap. The only real upside to my car is that if I blow the engine or transmission, it's like 9 bucks for both of those parts down at the local scrapyard.

quote:

Originally posted by Irishaddict get his wine collection out of our burning house.

LOL
hahahaha...my dad is the same way. but only diff is i'm a better drive and i drive all the cars at my house.

Re: Re: Do tell, is this a bit ridiculous or am I crazy? (INSURANCE FUN)

quote:

Originally posted by rabbitjoker Probably: Cost to rebuild MX5 < cost to rebuild New Yorker

this would only matter if there is collision coverage on it. If anyone is carrying collision on an 88 New Yorker they should re-evaluate that decision. Moreover, the insurer knows there is no way in hell they will be repairing an 88 New Yorker.... the Actual Cash Value (ACV) of that vehicle is likely less then $1000, the average claim is more then $1000, subsequently, it stands to reason that the vehicle will be declared a total loss in any collision.

I thought this one of the most ridiculous stipulations as well. I have a similar clause on my own insurance, and that of my 'rents whereby I can't drive one of their specific cars. I love how insurance reps always have a plausible, lengthy, and informative explanation to every single question I can ever ask, but not a one of them can do anything about the costs involved

It's such a scam. I've heard so many instances where people have taken advantage of it. Peple driving with basic insurance, due to a lack of ability to pay for better premiums, always end up paying more for nothing, and those rich enough to afford premium coverage use and abuse it. There seems to be miles of red tape and bureaucracy to the brim, yet these people are out there to 'protect me'. Sure sure.

i had to sign a waiver too....goddamn assholes

lets blow up their headquarters a la fightclub

quote:

Originally posted by zokissima I love how insurance reps always have a plausible, lengthy, and informative explanation to every single question I can ever ask, but not a one of them can do anything about the costs involved

If this was directed at me... hey, I'm just trying to help you all understand insurance rather then remaining part of the vast uneducated masses that simply bitch about it thinking it's just all a big scam. BTW, I'm an adjuster, not an agent or broker (normally what one refers to as a rep).... I don't sell anything, I pay claims. As for your "costs" I could probably provide lots of solutions for you as to how you can decrease your premium but chances are you won't like them and won't follow them, however, give me the details of yourself, your policy (insurer, coverage, deductibles), your vehicle, and your premium and I'll tell you how to decrease it.

Re: Re: Re: Do tell, is this a bit ridiculous or am I crazy? (INSURANCE FUN)

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard this would only matter if there is collision coverage on it. If anyone is carrying collision on an 88 New Yorker they should re-evaluate that decision. Moreover, the insurer knows there is no way in hell they will be repairing an 88 New Yorker.... the Actual Cash Value (ACV) of that vehicle is likely less then $1000, the average claim is more then $1000, subsequently, it stands to reason that the vehicle will be declared a total loss in any collision.

Yeah, there's only basic on my car. It would indeed be fucking retarded to have collision on it.

Maybe I should t-bone a bus full of nuns, and then hope that bus is rear ended by a chicken truck.

That'd be the best accident ever.

quote:

Originally posted by zokissima I thought this one of the most ridiculous stipulations as well. I have a similar clause on my own insurance, and that of my 'rents whereby I can't drive one of their specific cars. I love how insurance reps always have a plausible, lengthy, and informative explanation to every single question I can ever ask, but not a one of them can do anything about the costs involved It's such a scam. I've heard so many instances where people have taken advantage of it. Peple driving with basic insurance, due to a lack of ability to pay for better premiums, always end up paying more for nothing, and those rich enough to afford premium coverage use and abuse it. There seems to be miles of red tape and bureaucracy to the brim, yet these people are out there to 'protect me'. Sure sure.

Insurance is spreading the losses of the few amongst the many. You may pay insurance say for 5 years no claim, average premium 25+ is about 1200 so that is 1200*5=6000. So you pay 6000 for nothing for 5 years, but then u hit a van with a family in it and the insurance company has to pay out 5 million, then ppl are suddenly happy they have insurance.

It has nothing to do with being rich enough to afford full coverages then take advantage of it, once you make a at fault claim or 2 then your in the facility and paying 6grand for 6 months. To further that if a company sees that your claiming everything then they wont want to write you, or if your making piddly claims for windshields then they will exclude glass coverage (OPCF 13c, In ontario) on your vehicle.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Do tell, is this a bit ridiculous or am I crazy? (INSURANCE FUN)

quote:

Originally posted by VERTiG0 Yeah, there's only basic on my car. It would indeed be fucking retarded to have collision on it. Maybe I should t-bone a bus full of nuns, and then hope that bus is rear ended by a chicken truck.

better idea.... next time someone turns left across your path at an intersection you're approaching..... give 'er shit! Make sure you hit them. If they are turning left (in Ontario) they are at fault. You will get your vehicle writen off. Chances are you'll get $1000 under Direct Compensation (which is part of your liability coverage). I say you'll get $1,000 because typically that this the least an insurer will pay on a total loss (even if the ACV is $1 insurance companies will normally pay $1,000 as a basic transportation allowance). Then you'll want to make a claim for injuries and sue the other driver. As someone who investigates fraud and BI claims as a specialty I can help you out in this regard.

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard If this was directed at me...

lol no no no no, I actually like your posts. Its probably the single reason I have any understanding about why I have to pay so much. You explain. Insurance dealers I've spoken to in the past, they just never explain anything throughly enough for my tastes. Sorry bout that

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Do tell, is this a bit ridiculous or am I crazy? (INSURANCE FUN)

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard better idea.... next time someone turns left across your path at an intersection you're approaching..... give 'er shit! Make sure you hit them. If they are turning left (in Ontario) they are at fault. You will get your vehicle writen off. Chances are you'll get $1000 under Direct Compensation (which is part of your liability coverage). I say you'll get $1,000 because typically that this the least an insurer will pay on a total loss (even if the ACV is $1 insurance companies will normally pay $1,000 as a basic transportation allowance). Then you'll want to make a claim for injuries and sue the other driver. As someone who investigates fraud and BI claims as a specialty I can help you out in this regard.

I have JUST the intersection here in Cambridge for that, in fact I was thinking about this yesterday. But that's because it almost happened.

But let me get this straight, if I'm going straight through a lighted intersection and the guy opposite me is turning left and he could indeed make it if I didn't accelerate, but I did and hit him, they're still at fault?

quote:

Originally posted by zokissima lol no no no no, I actually like your posts. Its probably the single reason I have any understanding about why I have to pay so much. You explain. Insurance dealers I've spoken to in the past, they just never explain anything throughly enough for my tastes. Sorry bout that

Thanks, sorry to have been standoffish (I'm just used to taking a lot of shit due to my profession). If you want to know anything I'm always available to ask.

i was in an accident (not my fault) and my insurance rate still went up.
definately is a scam

quote:

Originally posted by geroin i was in an accident (not my fault) and my insurance rate still went up. definately is a scam

When and by how much? Also, please share the details.... was it really not your fault (as in you had 0% liability) or was it "not your fault" (as in "the guy in front of me stopped but I couldn't because the road was wet, sure I was following too close but I mean, he shouldn't have stopped).

Also, please note there are a multitude of factors other then experience that effect rates.... your rates could increase due to an increase in the amount the government allows your insurer to charge, inflation, change of address, increase in your driveing, any number of changes in material fact (which are usually discovered after a claim is made because that's when we find out you lied on your application for insurance in the first place.... the old registered in your grandma's name trick is pretty common), etc.

quote:

Originally posted by geroin i was in an accident (not my fault) and my insurance rate still went up. definately is a scam

I've heard of this before...but then again I was rear ended about 5 eyars ago (or maybe even more) and my insurance has never changed. Just for the record I just bought my own car and the insurance came out to be pretty decent actually

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard When and by how much? Also, please share the details.... was it really not your fault (as in you had 0% liability) or was it "not your fault" (as in "the guy in front of me stopped but I couldn't because the road was wet, sure I was following too close but I mean, he shouldn't have stopped).

i dont remember exactly by how much because my dad handles it. I already had an accident prior to that (maybe a year or two ago). I was at a red light changing a cd and i looked in the rearview mirror and i saw a car going at least 80 and then a split second it rear ended my car. I was in shock because i did not expect something like this to happen, especially at 4am. It looked like there was not much damage done to my car at first but when they inspected it the whole trunk underneath was smashed so it cost $4500 to fix. I also got a neck and a knee injury so i went for physiotherapy. Then next year after renewal my insurance rate went up (because i was a risky driver? i dont know).

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.