If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Another good one
On the news yesterday: liability premiums are not rising because of the
high settlements, but because of the low stock market. Insurance companies have large investments in stocks and bonds, and have lost a lot of money there over the last years. They have to make up for that in raising premiums. One thing though: I haven't heard of any other premium rising by more than 100% over the last few years, except for medical malpractice liability... :-\ -- -- I mommy to DS (July '02) mommy to three tiny angels (28 Oct'03, 17 Feb'04 & 20 May'04) guardian of DH (33) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Another good one
Ilse Witch wrote:
On the news yesterday: liability premiums are not rising because of the high settlements, but because of the low stock market. Insurance companies have large investments in stocks and bonds, and have lost a lot of money there over the last years. They have to make up for that in raising premiums. People have been going nuts about this around here for some time, now, because it's *apparently* (I stress that because I don't know for sure) the reason why we have outrageous car insurance premiums now. (and it's true - insurance *is* nuts right now for cars, where I live) DH keeps laughing at how insurance companies are so good at crunching numbers of one type but not another (i.e. they're good at calculating risks in their particular area, but not at calculating the risks of the stock market). |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Another good one
On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:57:19 -0400, Vicky Bilaniuk wrote:
DH keeps laughing at how insurance companies are so good at crunching numbers of one type but not another (i.e. they're good at calculating risks in their particular area, but not at calculating the risks of the stock market). Don't get me started on insurance. I'm shopping around for a new car insurance, trying to save some money. Here's the deal: they do a 'credit based insurance risk' assessment. Which takes into account (a) credit history (which I don't have), (b) house ownership (which I don't have), (c) time at current residence (2 yr). All because I just moved to the US. So although I've had car insurance for 10 years without any claims, owned my own house for 3 years, and are most likely the lowest risk ever, I still have to pay premiums for the highest risk group. But the lady on the phone assured me this is not discriminating against foreigners... Yeah, right :\ -- -- I mommy to DS (July '02) mommy to three tiny angels (28 Oct'03, 17 Feb'04 & 20 May'04) guardian of DH (33) |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Another good one
Ilse Witch wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:57:19 -0400, Vicky Bilaniuk wrote: DH keeps laughing at how insurance companies are so good at crunching numbers of one type but not another (i.e. they're good at calculating risks in their particular area, but not at calculating the risks of the stock market). Don't get me started on insurance. I'm shopping around for a new car insurance, trying to save some money. Here's the deal: they do a 'credit based insurance risk' assessment. Which takes into account (a) credit history (which I don't have), (b) house ownership (which I don't have), (c) time at current residence (2 yr). All because I just moved to the US. So although I've had car insurance for 10 years without any claims, owned my own house for 3 years, and are most likely the lowest risk ever, I still have to pay premiums for the highest risk group. But the lady on the phone assured me this is not discriminating against foreigners... Yeah, right :\ Oh I *hate* car insurance!! The insurance scene is not the world's greatest, here, but I think I'm probably not being treated *too* badly at the moment. However, that's about to change. ;-) I had to make two claims this year. One was a windshield that got smashed on a highway (freaked me right out because I could have gotten killed if that windshield had not held) and the other was due to theft. I also got my first ever speeding ticket (lowest they could issue, though, and the guy had no sympathy for a preggo chick who had forgotten that she went from a 100 to a 90 and didn't adjust accordingly). The rate on my current car is around $1300 Canadian per year and my deductible is really low. Next year, that will all be blown out of the water. :-( My deductible alone is going to increase by a factor of 5, yes 5. I don't yet know what my basic rate is going to go up to, though. You know the thing that ticks me off the most about car insurance, though? If you get into an accident, your rates go up *no matter who was at fault*. This is how it is in Ontario, at least. They call it no fault insurance. Several years ago, I was involved in an accident that was bad enough so that it wrote off my car (and yes there were injuries, but thankfully nothing really bad). The guy who hit me got charged. I was most definitely NOT at fault, yet my rates skyrocketed after that. I was actually very stressed out after this accident. Got a case of PTSD and everything. Having to suddenly pay nearly twice as much for insurance was a real kick in the teeth that did not help me get over that PTSD. Insurance companies are *most definitely* out to *make* money (which makes me wonder why we are required, by law, to pay them, at least for motor vehicles). Our house insurance is probably going to go up rather dramatically due to the recent flood, even though we suffered no damage. Isn't that just lovely? They're considering the entire area to be more risky, now. One of DH's colleagues said that his insurer told him that his rates would likely go up by 30%, even though he also didn't make a claim. Oh the joy. Oh yeah, and they've threatened to remove coverage for sewage backup in this entire area if the city doesn't upgrade the system. Now, I don't mind someone pressuring the city like that, because the city is run by dolts who would rather spend millions of dollars on stupid recreation buildings that have gone over budget and that no one wants, but it really bugs me that it's the little people who will suffer if the insurance companies follow through on that threat. (and personally, I'm going to investigate the cost of getting one of those backflow-stopping valves installed, just in case. Everyone who had sewage backup now seems to have toxic mold problems, so I'm nervous, especially if they rip away our coverage.) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
misc.kids FAQ on Good things about having kids | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 0 | July 29th 04 05:16 AM |
misc.kids FAQ on breastpumps, Part 1/2 | Beth Weiss | Info and FAQ's | 1 | May 4th 04 01:59 PM |
misc.kids FAQ on breastpumps, Part 1/2 | Beth Weiss | Info and FAQ's | 1 | April 18th 04 01:54 PM |
misc.kids FAQ on breastpumps, Part 1/2 | Beth Weiss | Info and FAQ's | 1 | December 31st 03 01:29 AM |
misc.kids FAQ on Breastfeeding Past the First Year | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 0 | December 15th 03 09:42 AM |