This is topic Insurance Question in forum General Talk at Northern California Ford Owners  .


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://californiafords.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=062940

---

Posted by 50/50 (Member # 1724) on :
 
I've figured out something interesting: Why would insurance companies want to know anyone in your household who has a drivers license and wants to know their age? One reason: Money! As long as your teenage kid has a license you'll pay high premiums. That is: if the insurance company knows. But, as long as you give/gave your teenager permission to use your vehicle the car is still covered. So, why tell how many licensed teens you have? You should have the right not to disclose who else will be driving. At a parents age the rates are alright.
 

---

Posted by Black 02 SS (Member # 5939) on :
 
Jesus, where to start off here. You may have "figured" out something interesting, but you are completely out of the ballpark and missed the critical thinking aspect.

First, insurance rates are calculated off RISK ASSESSMENT. Meaning, if we have a pool of 100 drivers and we know all of their background (years of driving experience, driving record, type of vehicle, etc etc) then we can make our best PREDICTION as to how MANY accidents there may be, how frequently they may occur, and how severe they may be. Using this information, every driver gets charged accordingly based on their variables (I mentioned some of them above). In theory, not all 100 people are going to crash at the same time but the pool of money collected will be sufficient so that when you are in need of somebody paying out $5,000 to $50,000 for your fuck up (whatever bodily and injury damage you've caused), then there is enough money in the pool to cover your ass. In theory, this is a fine dance of balance and it all works out in the end if no one cheats the system.

Now, what you have posited lets us (the CA Fords public) know that you have a sense of entitlement where you feel you shouldn't have to pay accordingly based on the level of risk you are introducing to the pool of drivers. Statistically speaking, the less experienced of a driver you are the more likely you are to be involved in an accident. You upset the balance by not allowing the insurance company to collect the proper amount of money to maintain the "fine dance of balance." This is extremely simplified, but think about it in the grand scheme of things among the millions of drivers on the road. You may HATE paying insurance, but you are entering a contract in which they will be required to indemnify you for the amount of coverage you have purchased, as outlined in your policy. You also have the option of filing a $35,000 bond with the CA DMV and foregoing the need to carry liability insurance. I assume this would be required for each driver on your policy.

Next, ask yourself: Do you have the sufficient capital to pay out bodily injury claims, property damage, or completely write off your car if you or your friend/spouse/girlfriend/child crashes your car and not receive any compensation?

This was the exact reason working in the insurance industry was a pain in the ass. People have ZERO clue of how insurance works and the benefit it give you when you pay into it and they blamed the wrong people for having to pay high premiums (if their driving record sucked, if they bought a car with a history of frequent accidents and they have ZERO experience, etc etc). A simple statistics course should be required for all US citizens, it would make MANY aspects clearer for them as consumers (not just insurance).

Hope that clarifies your misinterpretation

[ 2016-04-25, 01:53 AM: Message edited by: Black 02 SS ]
 

---

Posted by 166 Merlo (Member # 1549) on :
 
if you drive less that 50 miles a day average you can qualify up to a 50% discount
 

---

Posted by 50/50 (Member # 1724) on :
 
And besides, that's how Insurance Agents or should I say:"Sales Agents" make their money. The more you pay the more that Agent makes. Its a piece of the slice they make from the company.Its similar to plumbers working for a big company. The company makes 70% and the plumber gets 30%. I mean no disrespect to plumbers here but its no wonder plumbing costs so much to do.
 

---

Posted by i (Member # 12534) on :
 
One of the reasons why I take the bus from school is because of the insurance. Shyt I'm 21 I wonder how much they would charge now monthly? I haven't got a ticket yet.
 

---

Posted by 50/50 (Member # 1724) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by i:
One of the reasons why I take the bus from school is because of the insurance. Shyt I'm 21 I wonder how much they would charge now monthly? I haven't got a ticket yet.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Black 02 SS:
Jesus, where to start off here. You may have "figured" out something interesting, but you are completely out of the ballpark and missed the critical thinking aspect.

First, insurance rates are calculated off RISK ASSESSMENT. Meaning, if we have a pool of 100 drivers and we know all of their background (years of driving experience, driving record, type of vehicle, etc etc) then we can make our best PREDICTION as to how MANY accidents there may be, how frequently they may occur, and how severe they may be. Using this information, every driver gets charged accordingly based on their variables (I mentioned some of them above). In theory, not all 100 people are going to crash at the same time but the pool of money collected will be sufficient so that when you are in need of somebody paying out $5,000 to $50,000 for your fuck up (whatever bodily and injury damage you've caused), then there is enough money in the pool to cover your ass. In theory, this is a fine dance of balance and it all works out in the end if no one cheats the system.

Now, what you have posited lets us (the CA Fords public) know that you have a sense of entitlement where you feel you shouldn't have to pay accordingly based on the level of risk you are introducing to the pool of drivers. Statistically speaking, the less experienced of a driver you are the more likely you are to be involved in an accident. You upset the balance by not allowing the insurance company to collect the proper amount of money to maintain the "fine dance of balance." This is extremely simplified, but think about it in the grand scheme of things among the millions of drivers on the road. You may HATE paying insurance, but you are entering a contract in which they will be required to indemnify you for the amount of coverage you have purchased, as outlined in your policy. You also have the option of filing a $35,000 bond with the CA DMV and foregoing the need to carry liability insurance. I assume this would be required for each driver on your policy.

Next, ask yourself: Do you have the sufficient capital to pay out bodily injury claims, property damage, or completely write off your car if you or your friend/spouse/girlfriend/child crashes your car and not receive any compensation?

This was the exact reason working in the insurance industry was a pain in the ass. People have ZERO clue of how insurance works and the benefit it give you when you pay into it and they blamed the wrong people for having to pay high premiums (if their driving record sucked, if they bought a car with a history of frequent accidents and they have ZERO experience, etc etc). A simple statistics course should be required for all US citizens, it would make MANY aspects clearer for them as consumers (not just insurance).

Hope that clarifies your misinterpretation

---