Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: ICBC Sux & BCCOM

  1. #1
    flipin good Array flippy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Lovely Bike

    Angry ICBC Sux & BCCOM

    So BCCOM wants to save ICBC from competing with private insurance if and when the government decides to allow private insurance companies to enter the auto/motorcycle insurance biz. I'm originally from Alberta and let me tell you that with private insurance you will save big time on motorcycle insurance. To give you an example; I pay now about $145 a month with ICBC on my ZX9R, in Calgary (where I have lived), I would be paying about $75 a month for same coverage (last checked, Arpil 2002). Now, I am over 25 and male so If you are younger and male you might pay more. However, in Alberta if you have taken an accredited driving/riding school then your insurance rate falls. In fact, if you have a safe driving/riding record, your rate might actually fall every year. So, what BS is BCCOM trying to pull. Well, I support and acknowledge what BCCOM has done for motorcyclists in this province but in this case they don't know what they are talking about. Check out their site and read the some responce to this. I've lived in BC now for about 10 years so I have missed the days when BC had private insurance companies. From what I understand all was not well with the private insurance. Who's fault is that...the government of the time. I never had any problems, nor my family, nor friends with private insurance in Alberta. The government there has set sound rules that govern private insurance companies so that they cannot take advantage of the public. I for one will not support BCCOM on this.

  2. Remove Advertisements

  3. #2
    as a general rule i'v always disliked icbc much like everyone else, but a few months ago i did hear one very powerful argument for icbc from a colleague who had some sort of involvement with them. apparently icbc spends a huge amount of money on road safety improvement. they do studies of dangerous pieces of road all the time and actually spend the money to fix problem areas. i was given a few examples but unfortunately dont remember any of them. apparently no private insurance enterprise does this. i suppose this is something that would/should be done by the government normally, but icbc has a vested interest in improving driving conditions, so they put more effort into it than the govt would otherwise. anyone have any info on this? any confirmations or rejections?

  4. #3
    Resident Banana Array atomlowe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    sumfing nekkid
    I'm up in the air on this issue. If it means that the private insurers will ding you everytime you get a ticket or get into an accident that isn't your fault......then no. I've got no problem buying basic insurance from ICBC and then purchasing the rest from Morgan Fitzpatrick (sp?).
    Ride in peace my friends...

    Being a road crayon sucks....put your gear between you and the pavement.

    WTD: Hot girls with low morals. Own transportation a plus. Sufferers of yellow fever considered first. PM/email me for details.

  5. #4
    '04 R1 - You are mine! Array FloMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Yes please! Oh! That wasn't a question?
    Originally posted by frEEk
    i suppose this is something that would/should be done by the government normally, but icbc has a vested interest in improving driving conditions, so they put more effort into it than the govt would otherwise. anyone have any info on this? any confirmations or rejections?
    In case you didn't know this...ICBC=BC Gov. They are doing all this stuff through ICBC because it's a monoply and they are taking advantage of the opportunity to create an image of caring.
    Had the insurance industry been open to private compaies, the gov would still take care of dangerous roads and be proactive about safety because it's a major liability. They would probably charge all the insurance companies a fee and create a special agency to oversee this issue. Don't be blinded by politics. The only thing they are concerend with is to take more from us and how to give out less(by not losing lawsuits).
    “Your failure to be informed does not make me a wacko.”
    -John Loeffler

    “The truth will set you free, but first it will make you sick.”

  6. #5
    yep, i realize that floman. where i'm not convinced is that the govt would put as much effort into improving road safety as icbc does. as i said, i have only heard about this from one person, but it was a person whose word i trust. not some yahoo spewin rumours (like me). hence the reason i was hopin someone else may know about this. how true it is etc.

  7. #6
    On a soapbox Array Mechanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Above the 49th Parallel and completely beyond Hope
    Shuttleworth Snap

    Re: ICBC Sux & BCCOM

    [QUOTE]Originally posted by flippy

    Nothing is perfect. You don’t have to agree with everything BCCOM stands for. But make no mistake, they do more good for you as a biker, than they do harm. Join up, if you haven’t already, and speak your mind at a meeting.
    Chances are you may well be convinced by the arguments they have for staying with Icky-bicky. They’ve probably done more research than you have IMHO.
    BCCOM is a democracy, your opinion can only count if you contribute directly. They’re moving forward, are you?

    PS, I have some issues with BCCOM as well, I’m not blinkered.

  8. #7
    California dreamin' Array KatRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Vancouver Island
    2007 Triumph Tiger 1050
    The reason ICBC invests in road improvements is that it makes financial sense for them to do so. Fixing road related problems (e.g., building left turn bays at high accident intersections, installing traffic lights, signs warning of hazards, etc.) means that the number of claims goes down and they save money in the end. Would a private company do that? I doubt it. You want to know what private insurance companies do. It seems like they like to find ways to screw you. For example, in the US the insurance companies buy radar guns for the cops to catch speeders. Individuals who get caught speeding see huge increases in their insurance permiums and the insurance companies makes more money. That's BS as far as I am concerned.

    However, as FloMan said because ICBC is spending money on road inprovements this gets government (both the province and local governments) off the hook to some extent because they don't have to spend as much money on fixing roads. ICBC does it for them. Having said that though, we (the public) would have to pay for these improvements one way or another and I couldn't care less whether it's through taxes or insurance premiums. In fact, there might be some advantages in having a portion of our insurance premiums pay for road improvements because at least I know that money will actually be spent on road improvements. You cannot say the same for taxes (e.g., gasoline taxes, which should be spent on road improvements) which end up going into "general revenue" potentially getting spent on boondoggles like fast ferries, bailing out pulp mills that are not financially viable, the freakin' Olympics (don't get me started on what a bad idea that is) and other loser projects that the government has no business spending OUR money on.
    Last edited by KatRider; 07-07-2002 at 06:46 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts