Shopping Vehicles Vs. Insurance

[jwstewar]

Cost is probably do to having your son on your policy and the fact he drives a sports car. Ours was $190 a month extra for our daughter and a used PT Cruiser with just liability and pip. We had to exclude her as a driver on my truck and wife's car or it would have been quite a bit higher.

The Camaro is only about $125 per YEAR since it is defined as historical and limited use.

 

[jwstewar]

young son with bad record and sports car will cost a fortune to insure

Insurance went up $11 per month after the first incident. Policy hasn't renewed since the latest incident. The Camaro is only about $125 per year to insure.

 

[jwstewar]

BTW, one thing I want to point out. Some of the old rules we all knew about insurance aren't always true any longer. I still carry full coverage on my old '99 rusted Silverado. Why? Because for whatever reason, when Grange came out with their new homeowners product 5 or 6 years ago, the underwriters give you a better deal for carrying full coverage on all owned autos. If I drop the Silverado to liability only, it costs me another $35 or $40 per month. I know, it doesn't make sense, but that is the way it is.

BTW, I work for Grange in IT. I support the claims system, but don't have anything to do with the underwriting or the settling of claims.

 

[Diggin It]

Grange went completely goofy on rates. Nearly doubled over a few years for no reason at all. Had to kick 'em to the curb since I refuse to support corporate thievery.

 

[ddbackhoe]

I'm also an Actuary and have done claims projections and pricing for auto companies before.

If you know the game, you can get pretty good rates.

Ok, help enlighten me. My current insurer is USAA, auto is high but homeowners is ridiculous. They (and others) after some price shopping are insisting that my homeowners policy needs to be written for 850K but estimated market value is 700K.

 

[Snobdds]

Ok, help enlighten me. My current insurer is USAA, auto is high but homeowners is ridiculous. They (and others) after some price shopping are insisting that my homeowners policy needs to be written for 850K but estimated market value is 700K.

Need more info...

What's high (my high might be different from your high)
Umbrella policy?
age
location (by flood plain, ocean, river etc)
past claims
etc...

 

[ddbackhoe]

Need more info...

What's high (my high might be different from your high)
Umbrella policy?
age
location (by flood plain, ocean, river etc)
past claims
etc...

3900/year
500K Umbrella
Built in 1981
Not in flood plain, not waterfront
0 claims in history of house

 

[thekkfan]

High cost add on痴 that a lot of people pay for and never really benefit from are towing and rental car coverage.


TBS

That seems like a pretty dumb blanket statement.

I pay $4 each vehicle every 6 months for towing, lockout, gas. flat change, etc. On a 4 vehicle policy, one incident or call out will pay the premiums for this for 3 years- for all the vehicles!

 

[Snobdds]

3900/year
500K Umbrella
Built in 1981
Not in flood plain, not waterfront
0 claims in history of house

I looked up some values from a insurance benchmark database.

In Md, the average factor for insurance on a $200,000 home is 111. What does that mean? A home valued at $200K should be about $1800 per year in pure premium before risk factor credits. 200,000/111 = 1800 or 150 per month. Now we can apply that same logic to your house. It's insured for 850,000, so 850,000/111 = 7,657 per year or 638.14 per month of pure premium. Now the pure premium is then reduced by other stuff like an umbrella policy, low risk factor of natural damage, claims history etc. I don't know the exact factors your company used for each risk, but overall your getting 50% off your pure premium. That is pretty good.

Overall all I would say your rate is pretty competitive for your area and coverage limit.

Obviously this is a basic way of analyzing this and it gets a lot more complex than this, but this is a good way explaining it with out all of the industry speak.

 

[jwstewar]

Grange went completely goofy on rates. Nearly doubled over a few years for no reason at all. Had to kick 'em to the curb since I refuse to support corporate thievery.

We had a couple actuaries that went off the deep end. They are no longer here.

 

[Snobdds]

We had a couple actuaries that went off the deep end. They are no longer here.

I don't know how it works at Grange, but Actuaries role is to submit rate levels based upon their analysis to a committee of Marketing, Underwriting, Finance etc. The committee then puts in their input if their recommendations will work. Usually Marketing will want lower rates to be competitive in the market. Finance will give their take if the proposed rates will cover all expenses. Underwriting will show any unusual adverse selection that may be new. The final decision will be at the executive level.

I have never seen a company just fly blind with the recommendation of one area of expertise. That sounds like a recipe for disaster and it's a breakdown of effective leadership company wide.

 

[ddbackhoe]

Obviously this is a basic way of analyzing this and it gets a lot more complex than this, but this is a good way explaining it with out all of the industry speak.

Thanks for the tips. It has to be a lot more complex.. was told yesterday my carrier put an across the board $500 annual increase to offset claims losses, hence my increase. My new carrier wrote a slightly better policy for 2850/year, So what is the industry speak, whatever the market will bear? :confused2:

 

[two_bit_score]

Thanks for the tips. It has to be a lot more complex.. was told yesterday my carrier put an across the board $500 annual increase to offset claims losses, hence my increase. My new carrier wrote a slightly better policy for 2850/year, So what is the industry speak, whatever the market will bear? :confused2:

Literally, Yes!


They measure everything by the size of the $$$ involved for them. What has always mazed me is that people who get pennies on the $ to what the should be paid on their claims act grateful to the bottom feeders for the crumbs they get in exchange for their exorbitant premiums.




TBS

 

[npalen]

I bought a '65 Vette in '66 at age 20 with fuel injected 375 HP 327. The full coverage was $45/6 mos. Found out later that the lady at the insurance office recorded it as a Corvair instead of Corvette. No accidents luckily.

 

[jwstewar]

I don't know how it works at Grange, but Actuaries role is to submit rate levels based upon their analysis to a committee of Marketing, Underwriting, Finance etc. The committee then puts in their input if their recommendations will work. Usually Marketing will want lower rates to be competitive in the market. Finance will give their take if the proposed rates will cover all expenses. Underwriting will show any unusual adverse selection that may be new. The final decision will be at the executive level.

I have never seen a company just fly blind with the recommendation of one area of expertise. That sounds like a recipe for disaster and it's a breakdown of effective leadership company wide.

It is consensus, but that is where they put the blame, they used some wonky numbers.

 

[fried1765]

That痴 the least of your problems. At least you can drive without that working. I think vehicles got 田omplicated before most people realize. My 92 truck is one of the last offered by GM with a mechanical injection pump. And guess what, every factory option except the AC still works 30 years later. And the AC would probably work if I could still buy affordable R12. I致e got a 95 GM truck that痴 computer controlled everything. Even the gas pedal only controlled wires. I used to have a 99 Silverado that was all electric everything. Most of which didn稚 work. I still think the 2000 body style GM trucks are the best full size truck ever built.

Too bad we are so far apart.
I have a 30lb. bottle of R12 with 26 lbs still in it.
No longer have any use for it.