ok so here's my story:
Saturday I went paintballing in N.Van. I parked my bike for roughly 45 mins, and when I came back to it I noticed it had clearly been dropped on its side (although, whoever knocked it over was nice enough to at least pick it back up). There was no note or anything. There was lots of paint damage, a cracked rear fairing, broken mirror, turn signals, frame slider, etc, etc. Also, i found the broken mirror about 10 ft from the bike, buried under some gravel.
So Monday I had to go to ICBC, and the adjuster explained to me the following:
1. It counts as a collision because it impacted the ground.
2. It does NOT count as a hit/run because there was no damage to the other side of the bike.
3. It does NOT count as vandalism because there are no witnesses
Now, I agree with point 1 (it counts as a collision by definition under the MVA), I can even understand point 2, however, i cant understand point 3: that a witness is needed for a vandalism claim. imean, what the hell did I purchase comprehensive for if there NEEDS to be a witness?!!??!?! What sort of idiot in their right mind is going to tip my bike over (accident or intentional), then pick it up, and then hide my mirror with someone standing their watching them???
Since the ICBC adjuster needed witnesses, I told him that when I found the mirror buried under gravel 10 ft from the bike, and that 3 people saw me unbury it... and he could talk to them if he wanted. But the adjuster said no, thats not good enough.
Anyways, besides just wanting to rant, I was just wondering what your opinions are on ICBC's requirement to have witnesses for vandalism claims. Certainly i realize that ICBC must get alot of FALSE claims (especially from motorcyclists dropping their bikes)... but I definitely would have thought twice about purchasing comprehensive if i knew of this policy.