Our govt's giving back money!

In British Columbia we're all getting nearly $200 back from our auto insurer!

The province's mandatory auto insurance is provided by the government-run monopoly ICBC, although extra private coverage can be added. To me this arrangement has its pros & cons but in general I like it.

Besides insurance the corporation has the authority to make driving regulations and issue demerits toward restrictions or suspension - more potential pros & cons for sure but I think in general it has worked well.

We now have annual rates based on last year's mileage; nice for my own low-travel lifestyle. With Covid-reduced mileage/accident rates the system is suddenly over funded; so we're getting a rebate (which won't hurt the govt prospects for re-election of course.)

At times it's been said that some of the ICBC income goes straight to govt general revenue and that this is wrong. A recent innovation limits thesiz of damages for various personal injuries, intended to reduce the corporation's costs for lawyer fees.

What do you think of this sort of system? - regardless whether you've experienced it or not, but trying to keep idealistic political rhetoric out of it :).

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

swirlie · 31-35, F

[c=#008099]
200 bucks? That's it? That's chump-change in the Insurance industry. [/c]

Really · 80-89, M

@swirlie [quote]200 bucks? ...That's chump-change in the Insurance industry.[/quote]

But not in this pensioner's pocket. I don't recall ever being offered a refund by the insurance industry because it has too much money.

swirlie · 31-35, F

@Really
[c=#008099]
That was my point. If one paid for argument's sake, $900 annually for car insurance in BC, but you are asked by the government to stay at home except for essential trips to a grocery store, your mileage hence your potential liability risk of being out on the road in the first place has been reduced by close to 90% of what it typically might be, assuming one is laid off from their job.

That being the case in my example, insurance premiums should be voluntarily reduced by the insurance underwriters by the same percentage as your car no longer gets used nor is being placed within a high risk environment of being out on the road.

Having said that, my example should more closely reflect a premium reduction of 90% which is an $810 reduction, not $200. [/c]

Really · 80-89, M

@swirlie Good grief what an essay. I doubt auto insurers' vulnerability can be calculated solely by mileage even if that was based on fact rather than guesstimation, but I'm definitely not into trying to evaluate it - or in arguing the point.

swirlie · 31-35, F

@Really
Good grief what an essay.
[c=#008099]
Would you have preferred a 5-word incomplete sentence that conveyed a grammatically incomplete thought in response to your own essay that you wrote as a question-post? [/c]

Really · 80-89, M

@swirlie [quote]Would you have preferred a 5-word incomplete sentence that conveyed a grammatically incomplete thought in response to your own essay that you wrote as a question-post? [/quote]

It is far from inconceivable to me that I would have preferred the type of reponse which you have described; but that is conjecture on my part. My enjoyment of any reply to one of my posts usually depends on the contents of that reply and on my mood at the time of reading it.

I hope the above statement is sufficiently grammatical to facilitate your clear understanding of it.

Blech! - as we say down here among the grubby proles. :).

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

Really · 80-89, M

@swirlie I understand much, but not why you are addressing me with such insulting names and derogatory adjectives. I believe it's a sign of inability to control anger and an attempt to assuage that anger or maybe justify it to yourself; but is that working for you?

This comment is hidden. Show Comment