You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
i may be wrong but i think the number that keeps getting thrown around as to what the liberals pulled out was the amount over several years, not just in the last year. $1.3billion in deficits in one year, a lot of that is on ICBC.
This is true -- from every reading that I've done, the $1B number is a cumulative number that the Libs have taken out from ICBC. What is not clear to me is, how many years or which years was it that added up to $1B?
Another important fact not to be overlooked is how the Libs have conveniently sweeped this $1B number under the carpet and out of the radar for an X number of years. It is open (and reported) knowledge that the Libs have been siphoning money from ICBC into general revenues. However, nobody knows until now that $1B of that debt has been swept aside. As the government party, where is their responsibility to both ICBC and the BC residents?
Quote:
Cost of claims has doubled from 3billion to 5.9billion from 2013 to 2017. At the same time, Revenue has rose from 3.9billion to 6.1billion. I think that is a much bigger factor than the couple hundred million the government transferred out per year.
From the numbers you've dug up, I am seeing a 97% increase in costs of repairs, and a 56% increase in revenues. The 40% difference in those numbers is not a good sign to be sure -- nobody ever said ICBC was perfect. But it is nowhere nearly as bad as being in a $1B hole.
So for me, the majority of the blame remains with the Libs. They need to be held accountable for what they have done. (ICBC also needs to be held accountable for their shoddy operations, but they are the smaller bad guy for the moment.)
im pretty sure when this thread was brought up in the fall i spent some time and found ICBCs financial records for each year going back to about 2010 i think (but i cant 100% remember) including showing how much dividends were transfered to the government or it may have been in the provincial government budget.
regardless, the financials were pretty easy to find and they provided alot more information than what the media does.
im pretty sure when this thread was brought up in the fall i spent some time and found ICBCs financial records for each year going back to about 2010 i think (but i cant 100% remember) including showing how much dividends were transfered to the government or it may have been in the provincial government budget.
regardless, the financials were pretty easy to find and they provided alot more information than what the media does.
VANCOUVER (NEWS 1130) – What might tomorrow’s budget might mean for drivers across BC?
Thanks to ICBC recording losses of more than billion dollars this fiscal year, premiums are expected to climb again. But there’s no word on how much they will rise.
Attorney General David Eby, who’s now responsible for that Crown corporation, says Finance Minister Carole James really has no choice.
“What people are going to see in the budget on Tuesday is the impact of what happened when government didn’t address these out of control issues that now, because ICBC is losing so much money, it’s having a knock-on effect on vital provincial programs — the money that we hoped to put into different initiatives has been compromised.”
Eby has described the situation as a “financial dumpster fire.” He is again blaming the former Liberal government for failing to make improvements more than three years ago.
“The only options that we have in relation to the crisis we face at ICBC is either get the costs down or increase rates and that’s a direct consequence of government not taking action in 2014 to get ICBC under control — instead to clip pages out of a report and refuse to disclose it to the public. The report that said they needed to take that action.”
Eby is referring to an Ernst and Young document which recommended capping payouts for minor injuries. Starting next year, compensation for those claims will be limited to $5,500.
Any increase the finance minister puts forward must be approved by the BC Utilities Commission.
In November, basic auto insurance rates went up more than six per cent, averaging out to about $60 per driver.
Nothing pisses me off more than talking to my friends/family who work at ICBC, WorkSafe or CBSA (and probably every other crown/pseudo-crown corp if i had more friends). They just hemorrhage money like crazy
__________________
I searched for truth, and all I found was You
Dodged a bullet, looks like ICBC premiums not going up in the budget, capping pain and suffering payouts for soft tissue (read: unverifiable) injuries. It's still a pretty lefty budget but at least we're not going to get pillaged any harder for insurance on cars and bikes.
Nothing pisses me off more than talking to my friends/family who work at ICBC, WorkSafe or CBSA (and probably every other crown/pseudo-crown corp if i had more friends). They just hemorrhage money like crazy
Bc hydro is inspecting some piping down the street from me last week and this week. I walk by on my way to work everyday. Big hydro van idling in the street (with a generator running), two pickup trucks idling with no one in it. A traffic controller company with a pickup truck idling (with no one in it) 6 bc hydro staff standing around the van / trucks, one looking at papers, 4 on their cell phones and two talking to each other shooting the shit. The two traffic controller employees each on their phone.
It’s safe to assume each person is earning at least $35/hr. Every day I walk by and see the amount of wasted money and it makes me sick. That is one corner of one street in one city from a whole province.....
Dodged a bullet, looks like ICBC premiums not going up in the budget, capping pain and suffering payouts for soft tissue (read: unverifiable) injuries. It's still a pretty lefty budget but at least we're not going to get pillaged any harder for insurance on cars and bikes.
ICBC rates are going up but no mention on increase for premiums for bad drivers.
Rates go up 6.4% and they'll still cap injuries. Funny thing is that ppl actually believe cap on injuries will freeze icbc rates. Rates will only keep increasing, just means more money for the gov to work with.
Spoiler!
In January 2018, the British Columbia Utilities Commission (BCUC) approved ICBC's 2017 application for a basic rate increase of 6.4 per cent. This is an average increase of $4.75 per month for personal customers’ basic insurance coverage. These new rates became effective November 1, 2017, on an interim basis with the BCUC’s approval.
Yes but that rate increase was already determined and was not part of the provincial budget announced today. I was worried we’d see more increases as part of the budget to offset the $1.3B ICBC deficit.
Well, that $1.3B ICBC deficit isn't going anywhere any time soon, so it isn't like we dodged a bullet for now -- it's just that the guy with the gun hasn't shot yet. We are still in the point blank range.
Lots of info to process here as the engagement process begins.
For me I would be happy if I could get a 10% discount for driving under 5000kms per year. I would be happy to provide odometer proof.
"We want to make auto insurance rates more fair, and we want your feedback.
The B.C. government and ICBC want to introduce changes to the current system to make insurance rates more fair for British Columbians by making all drivers more accountable for their decisions and driving behaviour.
The model ICBC uses to help determine insurance rates is more than 30 years old. While it has seen some improvements over the years, it is out of date. This means that right now some drivers are paying more and others are paying less than the risk they represent.
British Columbians have been saying for years that the system would be more fair if lower risk drivers paid less for their insurance, and higher risk drivers paid more. We agree. Currently, most high-risk drivers are not paying enough to cover the future risks they represent on our roads.
As a result, we’re looking at changing the way insurance rates are determined for all vehicle owners, excluding those who have fleet vehicles.
Get involved
We want to know what you think of some of the changes being considered.
There are several ways to participate:
•Complete the online questionnaire on this site.
•Submit your feedback by email or mail.
•Organizations and experts can make submissions that will be posted to this site.
Your feedback will help design an improved auto insurance rating system for British Columbians, and help inform ICBC’s application on Basic insurance rate design to its regulator, the British Columbia Utilities Commission.
Feedback will be collected between March 5 and April 5, 2018 at 4pm."
__________________ Victoria Car Assessments - Condition assessments (test drive, photos, deficiencies and summary). RS member references available. IG @touringteg
1998 Acura Integra Type R #0635
2017 Honda Civic Type R #01818
Last edited by TouringTeg; 03-05-2018 at 02:50 PM.
Buddies of mine just sent me this survey. pretty interesting stuff. it looks like ICBC wanna charge "bad drivers" more and at fault claims will increase rates.
Do you still accumulate discount starting the day you get your DL? even without any cars registered under you name?
I remember getting like 30% discount on my insurance for my first car .
That was almost 20yrs ago so not sure if they changed it.
Buddies of mine just sent me this survey. pretty interesting stuff. it looks like ICBC wanna charge "bad drivers" more and at fault claims will increase rates.
Another outcome I got from that survey was they were moving towards driver based insurance as well. I.e. all drivers must be listed or explicitly excluded (Ontario often requires this for high risk drivers) with penalties for not listing drivers.
^I know so many people whose children have insurance under their names because it saves on insurance. I then remind them if the kid gets into an accident ICBC will not honour insurance...some listen and change policy, most don't.
I took the survey as well, and I liked how they split up into low-risk and high-risk.
If you have the occasional speeding or lane change w/out signaling ticket, fine whatever.
But if you have 4 excessive speedings in 2 years then you damn well can offset my insurance, or don't fucking drive. The current point based premium system isn't big enough of a deterrent. I'm glad they're at least trying to address it.
From that survey it looks like ICBC already has their plans figured out and they're hoping to get enough positive results from the survey to go ahead with them.
I really really like the idea of accidents following drivers, not vehicles. I think Manitoba does that.
It looks like ICBC is going to move towards a private insurance model where your insurance is going to go way up if you have tickets, etc.
It looks like they're considering removing the ability to pay off an accident and not have a claim against you. I dont like this, as their threshold in the survey is $2000. It takes literally nothing to do $2000 damage in a light fender bender now. Mirrors and Headlights are over $1000 now, when they were hardly $100 15 years ago.
There are a lot of questions pertaining to having someone borrow your car and get in an accident. It looks like they're considering fining vehicle owners for lending their car and not declaring the operator. That would be a massive pain in the ass to constantly be updating a list of people who might drive your car. The answers to the question on what the penalty would be don't let you select $0, so you can bet their 'findings' will say "people support a penalty".
I like the idea of increasing premiums for high risk drivers. However, it is a fine line labeling high risk drivers and Im afraid ICBC is going to say anyone without a perfect record is high risk when in reality high risk might actually catch 10% of drivers on the road. It already looks like this as their survey says 1/3rd of drivers are going to see an increase due to their risk factors. If this ends up where someone in a scenario of one 50/50 fender bender accident and one speeding ticket in the last 10 years sees a rate increase, it looks like an unfair cash grab.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
