ICBC wants more money from you!

[Seannnp]

On ‎6‎/‎8‎/‎2019 at 4:50 AM, Elias Pettersson said:

ICBC has been around for 46 years.  I highly doubt this is the year they turn things around...

Your statement would imply they have been problematic for the entire 46 years which couldn't be further from the truth. With the recent changes to how premiums are calculated, the CAP on compensation for minor injuries, limiting expenses in litigation, will save approx. 1 billion dollars. It may take 2-3 years but I fully expect ICBC to be in the green around the same time the Canucks becomes Stanley Cup contenders (3 years or so).

[Elias Pettersson]

5 hours ago, Seannnp said:

Your statement would imply they have been problematic for the entire 46 years which couldn't be further from the truth. With the recent changes to how premiums are calculated, the CAP on compensation for minor injuries, limiting expenses in litigation, will save approx. 1 billion dollars. It may take 2-3 years but I fully expect ICBC to be in the green around the same time the Canucks becomes Stanley Cup contenders (3 years or so).

If ICBC turns it around at the same time the Canucks become Stanley Cup contenders I may not be around to enjoy the fun...  

[MoneypuckOverlord]

ok it's not as bad as I think, its only for people with bad driving habits.  before it was just accidents at fault will effect it, but now its the clowns with driving convictions also.  

[bishopshodan]

19 hours ago, Seannnp said:

ICBC is not the one to blame for having to fight in court. That's the fault of your fathers lawyer. I have yet to see ICBC call anyone a liar without recommending criminal charges. ICBC has a different opinion of that of lawyer on how to quantify a claim. Everything has to be proven and the evidence has to speak to the injuries. I'm sure your dads lawyer was arguing for a loss of capacity or future wage loss that likely didn't match with the facts of his claim. My family has had several claims, each and everyone, the other drivers fault and we have never felt like we haven't received fair compensation. its difficult to place a numerical value on physical injuries. The problem is lawyers offering everything under the sun and trying to deliver just to drum up more business.

I hear you.

My fathers story is from about 30 years ago.

The 'liar' insinuation was more a comment on how much they believed he was actually hurt. They would send guys with cameras down into the bird sanctuary in front of our home to try to take pictures of him doing yard work etc. He was in so much pain, his doctor would tell him to try do little when he could, which may not have been good advice. Some good advice he did get from his doctor is to keep a journal of everyday, which he did. On the stand ICBC pulled out a dated picture of him raking the yard. His diary/ journal exonerated him as he had mentioned that day and that he was in crippling pain after trying to do an activity that the doctor suggested.

 

My sadness and perhaps misplaced anger towards ICBC is deeper than the above story though. Waiting for my dads claim to be settled took years and was very hard on the family. He had to change careers, he was never quite the same.

 

About 10 years after the accident he developed a tickle in his throat that wouldn't go away. He was getting tired to easily...

 

They don't know what triggers ALS. I remember my sister, who is also a doctor, telling me there are studies that suggest that it could be related to nerve injuries due to impact. She would often bring up 'the accident'.

 

I miss him so much.

 

Edited June 11, 2019 by bishopshodan

[jimmyking8888]

  Privatize auto insurance would be the best solution for BC people.    Monopoly is bad for consumers.  ICBC don't have to answer to anybody.  Their management just laugh at everybody while collecting fat bonuses.   All major banks and insurance companies should be allowed to compete for our business.  

[ItTakesAnArmy]

On 6/12/2019 at 3:44 AM, jimmyking8888 said:

  Privatize auto insurance would be the best solution for BC people.    Monopoly is bad for consumers.  ICBC don't have to answer to anybody.  Their management just laugh at everybody while collecting fat bonuses.   All major banks and insurance companies should be allowed to compete for our business.  

When ICBC was JUST an insurance company they were doing very well, 3 billion in the bank.

Along comes Campbell and he tries and fails to sell ICBC so instead he off loaded numerous government agencies to ICBC and let them pay for their duties.

Thousands of government employees suddenly became ICBC's employees'. As well as the costs of maintenance of those government buildings.

The costs of the entire Motor Vehicle Branch of government were off loaded onto ICBC crushing their surplus and costing 100's of millions.

 

The government liked this, more money in gen rev and now taxation via ICBC rate increases without backlash. Also no more strikes, ICBC pays for every thing and then increases rates.

 

ICBC was so good at hiding things that many Liberal insiders created insurance brokerage firms which ICBC pays some 600 million a year to renew your insurance, a feat that  a 6 year old can accomplish using a mouse and following instructions

 

I would estimate that ICBC has an additional 1.1 billion they spend that has nothing to do with insurance at all. No where else does a car insurance company give out driving tests, tickets, pay lawyers to fight speeding tickets, pay for equipment, bill collecting, numerous other expenses.

 

Simply they are the instrument of HIDDEN TAXATION. They are not the only "crown corporation" that is used for hidden taxation, just one of the biggest and most obvious if ANYONE THOUGHT to look.

Edited June 13, 2019 by ItTakesAnArmy

[thedestroyerofworlds]

On 6/11/2019 at 8:44 PM, jimmyking8888 said:

  Privatize auto insurance would be the best solution for BC people.    Monopoly is bad for consumers.  ICBC don't have to answer to anybody.  Their management just laugh at everybody while collecting fat bonuses.   All major banks and insurance companies should be allowed to compete for our business.  

I guess you haven't seen the obscene payouts that executives at numerous corporations get.  The ICBC management payouts are puny compared to those.  As for ICBC executive salaries from 2017/1018, none of them made over $500,000

https://www.icbc.com/about-icbc/company-info/Documents/2017-18-executive-compensation.pdf

Quote

Mark Blucher, Former President & CEO total compensation of $ 320,260 . Bill Carpenter, Chief Financial Officer & Chief Actuary total compensation of $ 404,469,  Steve Crombie , Vice President Corporate & Stakeholder Governance total compensation of $ 363,239, Alison Gould, Chief Investment Officer total compensation of $ 369,320 Nicolas Jimenez, Interim President & CEO total compensation of $ 382,132, Barbara Meens Thistle, Former Vice President Central Services total compensation of $ 274,021  Kathy Parslow , Vice President Claims and Driver Licensing total compensation of $ 397,768, Geri Prior, Former Chief Financial Officer total compensation of $ 415,685.

Care to guess what the CEO of RBC made last year?  $14.5 MILLION.  

https://www.advisor.ca/news/industry-news/rbc-ceo-made-14-5-million-in-2018/

 

The ICBC CEO wouldn't even come close to cracking the top 100 highest-paid CEO's in Canada.

https://www.canadianbusiness.com/lists-and-rankings/richest-people/canada-100-highest-paid-ceos/

 

 

I provided sources to back up my claims, so...

 

As for your claim that privatization would bed better: 

 

Please provide evidence to your claim that private would be better.  You will need to provide answers to each of these questions and provide evidence to back up said answers.  Failure to do so will mean your assertion that private will be better can be refuted without evidence.

 

The questions:

 

1)  How much cheaper will it be? 

 

2)  Will it provide better coverage? 

 

3)  Will it provide more services? 

 

4)  Will you get more money for your claims? 

 

5)  Will it be easier to make claims? 

 

6)  Will you be less likely to be refused a claim?  

 

[jimmyking8888]

  

1 hour ago, thedestroyerofworlds said:

I guess you haven't seen the obscene payouts that executives at numerous corporations get.  The ICBC management payouts are puny compared to those.  As for ICBC executive salaries from 2017/1018, none of them made over $500,000

https://www.icbc.com/about-icbc/company-info/Documents/2017-18-executive-compensation.pdf

Care to guess what the CEO of RBC made last year?  $14.5 MILLION.  

https://www.advisor.ca/news/industry-news/rbc-ceo-made-14-5-million-in-2018/

 

The ICBC CEO wouldn't even come close to cracking the top 100 highest-paid CEO's in Canada.

https://www.canadianbusiness.com/lists-and-rankings/richest-people/canada-100-highest-paid-ceos/

 

 

I provided sources to back up my claims, so...

 

As for your claim that privatization would bed better: 

 

Please provide evidence to your claim that private would be better.  You will need to provide answers to each of these questions and provide evidence to back up said answers.  Failure to do so will mean your assertion that private will be better can be refuted without evidence.

 

The questions:

 

1)  How much cheaper will it be? 

 

2)  Will it provide better coverage? 

 

3)  Will it provide more services? 

 

4)  Will you get more money for your claims? 

 

5)  Will it be easier to make claims? 

 

6)  Will you be less likely to be refused a claim?  

 

    Why are you comparing RBC's CEO with ICBC 's CEO anyways?     RBC is the most profitable well run companies in Canada.   RBC is a winning business , that company is hires full of winners.  Of course their CEO is entitle to make money.    ICBC is "a dumpster fire" quote by David Eby.    I think the person who runs dumpster shouldn't get paid at all.  After all it is not too complicated to run a dumpster and put fire in it.    By the way ICBC dumpster is still paying their former CEO salary. According to your link.

https://www.icbc.com/about-icbc/company-info/Documents/2017-18-executive-compensation.pdf

      Also, Why should I the be the one provide all these answer for you.    The common sense is to look at what other provinces are paying  yearly for car insurance.     Quebec is only paying 640$ .  Manitoba 1000$    Alber 1200$.      Here is link      https://www.arcinsurance.ca/blog/average-car-insurance-rates-across-canadian-provinces/

Unless you hate money or you own a autobody shop.   Privatize is the way to go for BC people. 

[Ronaldoescobar]

5 minutes ago, jimmyking8888 said:

  

    Why are you comparing RBC's CEO with ICBC 's CEO anyways?     RBC is the most profitable well run companies in Canada.   RBC is a winning business , that company is hires full of winners.  Of course their CEO is entitle to make money.    ICBC is "a dumpster fire" quote by David Eby.    I think the person who runs dumpster shouldn't get paid at all.  After all it is not too complicated to run a dumpster and put fire in it.    By the way ICBC dumpster is still paying their former CEO salary. According to your link.

https://www.icbc.com/about-icbc/company-info/Documents/2017-18-executive-compensation.pdf

      Also, Why should I the be the one provide all these answer for you.    The common sense is to look at what other provinces are paying  yearly for car insurance.     Quebec is only paying 640$ .  Manitoba 1000$    Alber 1200$.      Here is link      https://www.arcinsurance.ca/blog/average-car-insurance-rates-across-canadian-provinces/

Unless you hate money or you own a autobody shop.   Privatize is the way to go for BC people. 

Have to agree with the RBC part.. If your leading the company to record profits each year to the tune of $10-11billion than a low 8 figure salary is peanuts. In addition a large portion of that salary is made up of stock options that take s few years to vest.

Edited June 13, 2019 by Ronaldoescobar

[thedestroyerofworlds]

2 hours ago, jimmyking8888 said:

  

    Why are you comparing RBC's CEO with ICBC 's CEO anyways?     RBC is the most profitable well run companies in Canada.   RBC is a winning business , that company is hires full of winners.  Of course their CEO is entitle to make money.    ICBC is "a dumpster fire" quote by David Eby.    I think the person who runs dumpster shouldn't get paid at all.  After all it is not too complicated to run a dumpster and put fire in it.    By the way ICBC dumpster is still paying their former CEO salary. According to your link.

https://www.icbc.com/about-icbc/company-info/Documents/2017-18-executive-compensation.pdf

 

 

2 hours ago, Ronaldoescobar said:

Have to agree with the RBC part.. If your leading the company to record profits each year to the tune of $10-11billion than a low 8 figure salary is peanuts. In addition a large portion of that salary is made up of stock options that take s few years to vest.

Maybe I should have went with the compensation that the executive chairman of Sears Canada received as the company was going down in flames (from 2016). 

"Sears Canada Inc. designed a pay package for its new executive chairman, Brandon Stranzl, valued at $5.6-million in total compensation, which would make him one of the country's top-paid retail bosses at a company that has been in decline for years."

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/sears-canada-chairmans-pay-dropping-along-with-share-price/article29347636/

 

Yes, I do realize that part of their compensation is in stock.  Even still, they get paid more in cash than ICBC executives get paid in total.

 

 

The point of my post was to show that ICBC executives are hardly rich fat cats when compared to other Canadian Corporate executives.

 

2 hours ago, jimmyking8888 said:

  

      Also, Why should I the be the one provide all these answer for you.    The common sense is to look at what other provinces are paying  yearly for car insurance.     Quebec is only paying 640$ .  Manitoba 1000$    Alber 1200$.      Here is link      https://www.arcinsurance.ca/blog/average-car-insurance-rates-across-canadian-provinces/

Unless you hate money or you own a autobody shop.   Privatize is the way to go for BC people. 

And jimmyking8888, there is more to life than money.  As was pointed out by other posters, B.C. rates have been put all out of wack because of mismanagement caused by the B.C. LIEberals.  Tinfoil hat wearers would claim it was all part of a plan to eventually privatize it.  It was their b.s. that put us where we are.  You sort of answered 1), but the other 5 questions are also a factor.  You were the one who said privatizing was better.  It is you that needs to back up said claim.  Answering those questions and providing sources is how you convince me and others that your position is valid.  As of now, you have fallen short.

[Ronaldoescobar]

25 minutes ago, thedestroyerofworlds said:

 

Maybe I should have went with the compensation that the executive chairman of Sears Canada received as the company was going down in flames (from 2016). 

"Sears Canada Inc. designed a pay package for its new executive chairman, Brandon Stranzl, valued at $5.6-million in total compensation, which would make him one of the country's top-paid retail bosses at a company that has been in decline for years."

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/sears-canada-chairmans-pay-dropping-along-with-share-price/article29347636/

 

Yes, I do realize that part of their compensation is in stock.  Even still, they get paid more in cash than ICBC executives get paid in total.

 

 

The point of my post was to show that ICBC executives are hardly rich fat cats when compared to other Canadian Corporate executives.

 

And jimmyking8888, there is more to life than money.  As was pointed out by other posters, B.C. rates have been put all out of wack because of mismanagement caused by the B.C. LIEberals.  Tinfoil hat wearers would claim it was all part of a plan to eventually privatize it.  It was their b.s. that put us where we are.  You sort of answered 1), but the other 5 questions are also a factor.  You were the one who said privatizing was better.  It is you that needs to back up said claim.  Answering those questions and providing sources is how you convince me and others that your position is valid.  As of now, you have fallen short.

And my bad as well as I do agree with what you are saying. My point was more towards if you deserve it (in the case of the RBC CEO guiding the company to their profits) that they are paid accordingly. Of course more often than they are not.

[peaches5]

ICBC raised my rates from 175, a month, to 257, with a clean driving record no accidents, claims or tickets. I also qualified for the under 5,000km a year discount. The new rates are outrageous. Starting insurance rates are now 6,000 dollars a year so my discount from 6000 is 3000.  My rates this year were suppose to be 148/month with the 5000km or under discount. This is just a big slap in the face to anyone who is under 35 driving. 

[Tortorella's Rant]

1 hour ago, peaches5 said:

ICBC raised my rates from 175, a month, to 257, with a clean driving record no accidents, claims or tickets. I also qualified for the under 5,000km a year discount. The new rates are outrageous. Starting insurance rates are now 6,000 dollars a year so my discount from 6000 is 3000.  My rates this year were suppose to be 148/month with the 5000km or under discount. This is just a big slap in the face to anyone who is under 35 driving. 

I would just stop paying. Everyone should just stop paying. Nothing's going to change if we all keep giving in. 

[Russ]

2 hours ago, peaches5 said:

ICBC raised my rates from 175, a month, to 257, with a clean driving record no accidents, claims or tickets. I also qualified for the under 5,000km a year discount. The new rates are outrageous. Starting insurance rates are now 6,000 dollars a year so my discount from 6000 is 3000.  My rates this year were suppose to be 148/month with the 5000km or under discount. This is just a big slap in the face to anyone who is under 35 driving. 

Well $&!# i got mine coming up in a couple months. I wanted to get a new car, guess i might keep my crap car now

[peaches5]

11 hours ago, Russ said:

Well $&!# i got mine coming up in a couple months. I wanted to get a new car, guess i might keep my crap car now

There are a ton of little stipulations they've added to try and remove as many discounts as they can from your driving history. Tickets, location of vehicle - different areas you live in have higher insurance rates now, number of registered drivers of the vehicle, your years with the L no longer count towards safe drivers discount, the discount for each year is also much smaller now although instead of just 9 years you can get up to 40 with a larger discount if you have 40 years of safe driving. How many people will go 40 years and never get a ticker or claim? My insurance broker said its about 50/50 with people paying more or less under the new system. Younger drivers/new are just getting shafted. 

 

&^@#ing boomers is what I have to say.

[inane]

25 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

There are a ton of little stipulations they've added to try and remove as many discounts as they can from your driving history. Tickets, location of vehicle - different areas you live in have higher insurance rates now, number of registered drivers of the vehicle, your years with the L no longer count towards safe drivers discount, the discount for each year is also much smaller now although instead of just 9 years you can get up to 40 with a larger discount if you have 40 years of safe driving. How many people will go 40 years and never get a ticker or claim? My insurance broker said its about 50/50 with people paying more or less under the new system. Younger drivers/new are just getting shafted. 

 

&^@#ing boomers is what I have to say.

Maybe bad drivers who choose to drive expensive cars that require expensive fixes are part of the problem? Blame icbc all you want but if people would just slow down and crash less, this wouldn't be as large of a problem. 

[Lancaster]

2 minutes ago, inane said:

Maybe bad drivers who choose to drive expensive cars that require expensive fixes are part of the problem? Blame icbc all you want but if people would just slow down and crash less, this wouldn't be as large of a problem. 

It's not really speed per se... it's interactions and situational awareness.

Whenever I'm driving in the US or in Japan, it always feel less stressed compared to driving in Vancouver.  Maybe too many people locally are driving with a "I don't give a **** about others on the road" mentality?

 

A tad unrelated... one thing I always found kind of weird, and it perhaps speaks about the competency of the skills of the drivers.... lots of folks tends to speed while driving on the bridge, but slow down when driving in a tunnel.  I mean why the discrepancy?  If anything, tunnels should be safer as you're not supposed to change lanes and you just simply drive straight.  Maybe it's the cover that is making people more apprehensive.... but it's not like people don't drive at night.  

 

 

[inane]

1 minute ago, Lancaster said:

It's not really speed per se... it's interactions and situational awareness.

Whenever I'm driving in the US or in Japan, it always feel less stressed compared to driving in Vancouver.  Maybe too many people locally are driving with a "I don't give a **** about others on the road" mentality?

 

A tad unrelated... one thing I always found kind of weird, and it perhaps speaks about the competency of the skills of the drivers.... lots of folks tends to speed while driving on the bridge, but slow down when driving in a tunnel.  I mean why the discrepancy?  If anything, tunnels should be safer as you're not supposed to change lanes and you just simply drive straight.  Maybe it's the cover that is making people more apprehensive.... but it's not like people don't drive at night.  

 

 

Sure it's not just speed, but a majority of crashes could be avoided or the impact would be significantly less if people were going slower, being at a safe distance, off their phone etc. 

 

People think driving is a right and should be cheap and fast. It's not, get over it. 

[189lb enforcers?]

Still a monopoly. 

I have several vehicles and toys, all of which need separate plates and insurances. 

Thats ridiculous, being that it’s all coming from one provider. 

For somethings, like boats, you have options for insurance, but the monopoly ICBC has on this service needs to change. 

[peaches5]

1 hour ago, inane said:

Sure it's not just speed, but a majority of crashes could be avoided or the impact would be significantly less if people were going slower, being at a safe distance, off their phone etc. 

 

People think driving is a right and should be cheap and fast. It's not, get over it. 

Okay, you're not understanding that ICBC is making it much harder to get safe driver discounts. Instead of getting the max discount at 9 years of safe driving it's now 40, although it's a larger discount it's a much more gradual decline to that discount. People who have never had an accident, ticket, or claim are now, potentially, paying more when they did nothing wrong. The system is designed to applease boomers. The younger generation is just getting screwed by something they didn't cause. Not only that but as I said it's now much harder to reach that maximum discount there's more than just a claim that can ruin your driving record. It's designed so people already there will keep their discounts and people trying to get there will struggle.