Cdnshaz

Does public transport cover Canada like it does UK, no...so we may have more accidents but we have less public transport hence we NEED to drive..I have NO public transport where I will be living, we don't even have cabs.

I do think insurance is much more competitive on both home and car in the UK, canadian insurance companies will gouge you to the last penny...to which we are held to ransom and have to pay, esp when you choose to live in the country and no public transport made available.

jimf

Most of the accidents I notice in Calgary are the low speed shunt type which would probably not be included in any official death/injury statistics. In the UK this type of thing would be fairly unusual to see but in Calgary seems to be commonplace both in summer and winter.

jericho

I know people complain about the cost of car insurance (mine is $1800 a year), but Auto Insurance is a loss making business. I dont know of any markets that write the business profitably.

Almost Canadian

Good, nice, kind hearted insurance companies. We should all give them a big, sloppy kiss

agr

So let's get this straight, insurance companies are gouging those who choose to live in the country, because they have to drive. And because they have to drive, they have more accidents (but that doesn't mean insurance should be expensive). And the death and destruction would reduce to UK levels if there was public transport in rural areas?

Have you thought about a career in Alberta politics? You'd go far.

backhomeagain

Hi We live in Calgary, Alberta and we got our car insurance through TD Canada Trust bank. They accepted proof of no claims from our UK broker. We still probably over paid a little but our insurance was $1400 ish for a 1998 chevvy venture. We pay monthly installments of around $120 - with no premium on top for the privilege of montlhy payments (not like some English insurance compaanies - Direct Line!)
Hope this helps

Jay

Cdnshaz

Insurance gouges everyone who drives, but if you live in area with no public transport or small towns with no buses or subways...how do you get anywhere? oh gee you have to drive.....hence you are on the road more and more chance of getting into an accident....esp Alberta where teens drive at 14! (or used to)
The main topic on this discussion was price of insurance....in a nutshell if you drive in Canada it will cost you big bucks....

Aviator

ICBC seem to be doing OK. Enough to let the taxpayers cover the cost of insuring the Olympic vehicles, plus more.

jericho

No, not really. Insurers typically measure their performance in terms of "combined ratios". Eg/ a Combined Ratio of 80% means that for every dollar the company receives in premium, they pay out 80 cents in claims/salaries/expenses, etc.
Anything over 100% means the insurer made a loss. In the past, Insurers could rely on stock market returns to make a profit, but in that's not really been the case for the last couple of years.

ICBC's figures for the last few years:
2006: 106.4%
2007: 101%
2008: 95.9%
2009: 104.2% (target)

Keep in mind that Liability claims take a couple of years to mature, so 2008 could easily move up or down (as could the others potentially).

Alan2005

That's not because ICBC's premiums are too low, it's cos it's running costs are too high.

Aviator

How the insurance companies choose to measure their performace is irrelevant. Reality is they make a profit/surplus from operations. It may be an indirect profit, but none the less a profit. Their ratio does not take into account returns on investments of premiums. ROI has not been so great lately, but over the years all insurers have done pretty well. I don't swallow that they made no money, why else would they do it? Because they feel charitable to motorists? I seriously doubt that. The ICBC mandate is to break even, but even they make a surplus on total revenue.

Even if the loss making scenario were reality, they would either go bankrupt really quickly or other insurance premiums are buffering up auto insurance. Either way we pay through the nose for it.

jericho

I'm not here to argue the figures- they are what they are. And I'll repeat, Auto insurance is a loss making business. Why do people write it? Because, in most cases (in the private sector) it's a loss leader. They do it to get access to Homeowners and in the Commercial sector, property and casualty business.
Some insurers will make a profit because prior years turn out to be not as bad as they thought, so they can release reserves they were holding back.

Besides, I'm not disputing that auto insurance is expensive. It is, but the reality is it aint gonna get any cheaper.

Aviator

This from 2005 http://www.consumer.ca/1683 (not likley to be a lot different now as ICBC did not drop rates) seems to contradict this as far as ICBC is concerned as well as mentioning record profits from Ontario auto insurers.

CBC in 2007 http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-col...cbcpofits.html

Canada.com in 2006 http://www.canada.com/theprovince/ne...d-628d9345e678

No mention of losses here either!
http://www.ndpopposition.ab.ca/site/...D=269&t=8&i=47

Where do the reserves come from that you mention, profits?

jericho

No idea where they get their figures from, but here's their financial statements: http://apps.icbc.com/inside_icbc/pdf...nce_PI186P.pdf

We can throw links at each other all day, but the fact remains that Auto Insurance- generally speaking- doesnt make money.

Aviator

This is a PR document, not their financial statements. I would love to see their financial statements such as the P & L & balance sheet if you can post those.