Insuring a car
- Thread starter rogier21
- Start date
Firstly Canada is not the only country people are committing insurance fraud even insurance companies have insurance against fraud.
Secondly, insurance fraud in Canada is high because criminals know they can get away easily. Laws need to change, do politicians maybe think about something like this? or perhaps its outside their jurisdiction.
They can talk about this crap till the cows come home and as usual because of the thick bureaucratic red tape things will not change (keep Canadian flag in mind). Its a catch 22, people do fraud because Car insurance is expensive. You can date this comment for future reference and its not my arrogance its my confidence, insurance premiums in this country will never go down.
Secondly, insurance fraud in Canada is high because criminals know they can get away easily. Laws need to change, do politicians maybe think about something like this? or perhaps its outside their jurisdiction.
They can talk about this crap till the cows come home and as usual because of the thick bureaucratic red tape things will not change (keep Canadian flag in mind). Its a catch 22, people do fraud because Car insurance is expensive. You can date this comment for future reference and its not my arrogance its my confidence, insurance premiums in this country will never go down.
So true Newtone.
One thing that doesn't make sense to me about all this talk about fraud is this; if claims are recognized as fraudulent, that implies the insurance companies recognized it as such and did not pay the claimant, or if fraud was detected after a pay out, they must have recouped the money already paid through legal or other means. So, if this is the case, how on earth are they losing money due to fraud?
It seems they are merely saying a lot of claims are fraudulent because they suspect this but cannot prove it, which means they have staff who are not well-trained in fraud detection.Indeed most of the job listings for such positions usually only require someone with a high school diploma.Add this to a job culture where it is who and not what you know that gets you a job and you have the present situation where consumers are made to pay for entrenched, across-the-board incompetency seen within the insurance (and other) sector(s).
Wouldn't a lot of the would-be fraudsters be deterred by CCTV cameras on major roads and intersections? Why can't they have that set up? The answer is obvious; they have NO justification for the premiums they charge and as such, are happy as things are, making a lot of money off motorists, aided and abetted by Ontario politicians....
One thing that doesn't make sense to me about all this talk about fraud is this; if claims are recognized as fraudulent, that implies the insurance companies recognized it as such and did not pay the claimant, or if fraud was detected after a pay out, they must have recouped the money already paid through legal or other means. So, if this is the case, how on earth are they losing money due to fraud?
It seems they are merely saying a lot of claims are fraudulent because they suspect this but cannot prove it, which means they have staff who are not well-trained in fraud detection.Indeed most of the job listings for such positions usually only require someone with a high school diploma.Add this to a job culture where it is who and not what you know that gets you a job and you have the present situation where consumers are made to pay for entrenched, across-the-board incompetency seen within the insurance (and other) sector(s).
Wouldn't a lot of the would-be fraudsters be deterred by CCTV cameras on major roads and intersections? Why can't they have that set up? The answer is obvious; they have NO justification for the premiums they charge and as such, are happy as things are, making a lot of money off motorists, aided and abetted by Ontario politicians....
ADUFE said:
is it true that:
"I'll take Toronto as an example: 1. Auto Insurance $200/month to $600/month, if you dont like to drive a car, no problem using the subway will cost you $3 one way, if time is not an issue then there is no grantee when you'll reach your destination on time."
any idea in Calgary to pay liability only for a Nissan 2006 sentra with good driving record 10+ years for a family man with kids in USA? any wild guess? I am thinking if I need to dump the car before I move to Calgary this May or June.
1500 is absurd, for what ever car and whatever terms and conditions to be insured. if an industry gouges the public either by monopoly or by price fix, should not the government to step in and introduce the competition to protect the public interests?steaky said:
Well, drivers in BC does not have the right to shop around for car insurance. The government has already step in because the only insurance company, ICBC, is own by the government. There are many autoplan brokers, though.bkd1969 said:
then legislators, representing the voters, like you and others not like the monopoly, make the law change and break up the monopoly, introduce the competition, and protect the public. Also, the lobby groups representing the business interested in insurance but excluded out should lobby the legislators to make the change, let alone other lobby groups labeled as protection of public interests. WORK TOGETHER.steaky said:
It's easier to say than do. Like the current Liberal government, just a few short weeks after they were elected in 2009 on a no HST-platform, the government announced that BC would be entering into an agreement with the federal government to harmonize the PST and the GST. Who would know that legislators /politicians/the government could be elected promised one thing, and then turn around and done the opposite?bkd1969 said: