Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

ICBC wants more money from you!


Recommended Posts

  

The Insurance Corporation of British Columbia (ICBC) has announced another phase of their new rate model which will see customers with frequent or serious driving convictions paying more for their optional insurance coverage starting Sept. 1.    After June 10, driving convictions will have the potential to affect premiums. The premiums will escalate in line with the frequency and seriousness of those convictions.   Serious driving convictions such as Criminal Code offences, impaired driving, excessive speeding and distracted driving, will result in increased premiums after the first conviction.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, thedestroyerofworlds said:

I don't see a problem with charging individuals with frequent /serious driving infractions more money.  SPEED kills.  Distracted driving kills.  These people should see more than just their insurance rates going up.  These people should have their licenses taken away.  I have no sympathy for someone who gets regular speeding tickets having their insurance go up.  

 

Change my mind.

I've always thought distracted driving should be treated like drunk driving.

 

At least the drunks are usually aware of what is going on, and are actively trying to not hit anything. They're just too wasted to react to it properly.

 

Distracted drivers are completely unaware, and are unable to then decide to 'not actively hit stuff'.

 

So, if you're busted texting and driving? Car impounded for a week and a huge fine.

 

 

The harsh response to DUI laws seems to have slowed (though not stopped) the drunk driving, at least in my area. Do the same for distracted driving. Charging them more on insurance *when* they crash doesn't solve the problem of whoever they ran into being injured or dead.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone who complains about this are the same people who scam/abuse the system in regards to vehicle theft, hit and runs, exaggerated injuries claims and exotic/luxury vehicle insurance. 

 

I used to complain about the constant hikes too until I saw it from a different perspective and the yearly costs it has. People of BC have no one to blame but themselves.

  • Cheers 1
  • Wat 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, butters said:

you think private companies wouldn't (don't) already do this?

Yes they do.  But you can't go to a private company for the basic insurance.  It's still a monopoly that needs to go away.  It's a proven fact that competition leads to lower prices in every area of life.  There is a reason ICBC rates are through the roof, go up almost every year while the company itself loses millions of dollars a year.  It's because the government is running it, not an actual business owner who knows how to run a business and make a profit.  

 

Allow the private companies to offer the basic insurance and provide more competition and you will see premiums go down guaranteed while still making a profit.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, brownky said:

I've always thought distracted driving should be treated like drunk driving.

 

At least the drunks are usually aware of what is going on, and are actively trying to not hit anything. They're just too wasted to react to it properly.

 

Distracted drivers are completely unaware, and are unable to then decide to 'not actively hit stuff'.

 

So, if you're busted texting and driving? Car impounded for a week and a huge fine.

 

 

The harsh response to DUI laws seems to have slowed (though not stopped) the drunk driving, at least in my area. Do the same for distracted driving. Charging them more on insurance *when* they crash doesn't solve the problem of whoever they ran into being injured or dead.

Advertising down here in CA equates the two. 

 

You've hit the nail on the head, IMO. 

 

My wish, although I know there would be legal issues, would be to have the phone confiscated on the spot, and destroyed in front of the owner.  For some, that would be worse than any fine.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, RRypien37 said:

 People of BC have no one to blame but themselves.

Not sure if I'm reading this correctly or not Ryp,  but I take some exception to this statement. 

I'm born, raised and live in BC.  I'm as honest a person as you'll ever meet. I've  never scammed icbc  (or anyone else for that matter), or faked anything and I've paid my share of premiums for the past 30 years.   

Exactly how am I to be blamed for this?

 

Target bad drivers with increased premiums and give relief to safe drivers, Period! 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Kragar said:

Advertising down here in CA equates the two. 

 

You've hit the nail on the head, IMO. 

 

My wish, although I know there would be legal issues, would be to have the phone confiscated on the spot, and destroyed in front of the owner.  For some, that would be worse than any fine.

For a lot of people losing their phone would be worse than losing their car.  You can always take skytrain to get to where you need to go but I can't remember the last time I saw a pay phone on the street...  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...