Liriope wrote: Chuckster11--if they take Berner2's word without proof then they must take all policy holders word or they will be discriminating and "that is against the law" in every state in the nation.
I worked a lot of years in law enforcement and a couple of years in insurance, and I've never heard of such a law. Do you have a code section or reference for it? I've been with my insurance company for over 35 years and they always take my word for and have never asked for proof of mileage. So you're saying if Farmers Insurance has ever asked any other customer for proof of their mileage they are discriminating because they never asked me?
2004 National Tropi-Cal T-350, Class A, Triple slide, 330 HP Cat DP. 2006 Dodge Dakota 4x4 or
2002 Harley FLSTF Fat Boy on a Trailer or
2004 Polaris Quad on the Trailer
gijoecam wrote: I don't understand the reasoning for the mileage information in the first place.
If you drive more miles than they think you do, so what? You're not an increased liability... Those limits are selected and paid for by you, the customer.
If you total the vehicle, they're only going to pay you for what it was worth at the time of the accident. That will be based on the mileage displayed on the odometer when the adjuster shows up to evaluate the claim. What it had on the odometer 2 or 3 or 4 months ago is irrelevant at that point, isn't it?
IMHO, if the insurance company wants to know precisely how many miles I'm putting on all my vehicles, I'm going elsewhere.
Pretty sure almost all insurance companies are going to base rates on how you use your vehicle. And yes, the more miles you drive the more of a risk you are just by simple math. The question is how much your company checks up on you and what proof they require. If you lie to your ins company and claim you only drive 10k miles a year when you really drive 30k miles a year you may be fine until you have a claim. One of the first thing the insurance adjuster checks when he or she inspects the car is the odometer. If it doesn't match what you claimed, then you may find yourself in a little hot water with the company. I doubt they would deny your claim, but you could get canceled and then have a difficult time getting another policy.
Liriope wrote: chuckster11 wrote:Insurance companies can and do discriminate amongst their customer base all the time, they raise rates for some, lower rates for others, cancel policies, reinstate policies (when they want to), etc. The entire philosophy behind successful and profitable insurance industry is discrimination--charging the proper rate for the proper risk--each one unique and individual.
chuckster11, no, insurance "DO NOT" discriminate all the time. It is illegal. Yes, they raise rates "but only a class of individuals, not single out an individual and ONLY raise his rates". Yes, they cancel policies "for a reason, using the same reason for all not by singling out one driver and not the next".
This is not called discriminating it is called "class rating". Again, it is against the law for any insurance company to treat policy holder A different than Policy Holder B, C or D.
Let me give you an example of discriminating in my field, leasing: I have a tenant who has rented my house for 10 years, never been late and always pays his bill on time. One day he is late per the lease and I decide to wave the late charged called for in the lease because he has been a good tenant for a number of years and has a good reason for being late.
As a landlord, you do that and you just waived all late charges for all your tenants because when you do not charge "everyone" a late charge who has been late, the policy become invalid. Sounds harsh, well that is an actual case and that is exactly what the courts ruled.
You must treat everyone the same, no exceptions or you are discriminating. This the courts have ruled.
Also for the record, I was a Property & Casualty Insurance Agent for a number of years for one of the largest property & casualty insurace companies.
I don't know where you're getting this but you couldn't be more wrong. There is no law that says you can't treat customers different based on your relationship with that customer. You can waive a late fee for one and not for another. There is no crime there unless you base your decisions on a protected class such as race or gender. A long time customer sure as heck can be provided with different servce than a short time customer. Lots of decisions is private companies are based on descretion and you have different people making those decisions so of course customers will get different levels of service.
msmith199--no I am not wrong. I did not say there was a law, I said the "courts" ruled it discriminating" therefore in effect making it a law.
I belong to an association for property owners. Per their newsletter a few months ago, the courts ruled in an actual case, if you have late charges for late payments, if you waive a late payment for one tenant, then you can no longer charge late payments for all your tenants. They ruled that you must be consistent and you cannot treat one tenant different than another. That would be discrimination and discrimination is against the law. Those are not my words, they are the courts ruling based on an actual case.
If you do not believe me, call any large property management company and they will tell you the same thing. Now, if it is discriminating on tenants, does it also make sense that it is also discriminating for car insurance companies? It is the exact same thing.
I'm not saying that an insurance company has to have discount for mileage. What I'm saying, if they do, they must treat everyone the same.
The insurance company I worked for, used credit as form of underwriting. If you did not pass their credit score or rating, you payed a higher price. No exceptions even if you had other business with the same company. To do otherwise would be discriminating.
msmith1199--in reference to the Farmers insurance question: If Farmers accepted your word of mileage driven and then made another customer with the same policy "prove" their mileage by not taking his word, yes they are discriminating. It does not mean a lot of lazy agent where no management checks their records do not do this, but when they do, yes, they are discriminating and if taken to court would cost Farmers a lot of money.
I can assure you that the company I worked for would never make exception to rules for a policy holder for this exact reason. I'm not saying some of our agents did not in fact break this policy because I know for a fact they did. When caught, they paid for it, some by losing their job. Do not believe me, call any litigator who specializes in discriminating law.
So if I have a 7-11 and a little kid walks into my store and I give him a piece of candy, I have to give every little kid that comes into my store a piece of candy too or I'm discriminating? Please give me the reference to this case you are talking about.
They are trying to keep your rate down based on mileage. If you want to avoid the proof, just get off the mileage program. I have my vehicles on that program and gladly send in the mileage. If they want proof i drive over to my agents office. Just not that big a deal for me
"The great challenge of adulthood is holding on to your idealism after you lose your innocence."
– Bruce Springsteen
Comparing an insurance company's business practice versus a homeowner-renter-leasor form of business is like comparing an apple and an orange......A renter or leasor seems to have more exclusive rights when it comes to renting which is based at a state law of jurisdiction, as insurance companies are also regulated based under state law of jurisdiction.
So pretty much an insurance company can botch their own rules as long as no state or federal law or regulation keeps them from doing so, as they have coffers, lobbyists, lawyers, and other connections to stay on the upper hand of their business practices, especially what they want or not want to compensate upon a claim or in court as they feel, but I will not go there.
This one insurance company that is no longer doing business in the State of Alaska I believe violated federal law when I first acquired auto insurance when Alaska started enforcing mandatory proof of insurance in October 2002 (from the old law when you only had to show proof of insurance if you were in an accident or caused bodily injury to someone) as of course the cheapest insurance price for me was at a premium because their excuse was I was not an concurrent insured driver for the past 6 months, so had to live with what they charged me just to comply with the law....
This is what really bothered me though :
The agent requested me to disclose my social security number and I refused to do so on grounds of federal law stating I did not need to disclose that number to any agency other than the IRS or SSA, and in order to deter potential identity theft...
She stated the database on the computer will not advance unless a number is provided....so I told her to try 000-00-0000 and she entered the number as the computer advanced to the next window and thus became an insured driver...
Two weeks later I got a call from the headquarters based in Dallas Texas informing me either I disclose a 'legitimate' social security number or they will immediately drop me from coverage, in which I informed them they would be violating federal law if they did so unless you are compensating me some form of reported income....
A week later by mail I recieved a formal notice dated the day I spoke to them on the phone stating they had cancelled coverage based on insufficient information with an enclosed check for the full amount I had paid, cashed the check and moved on....
Got insured by another company as they too asked for a social security number as I stated I refuse to disclose it, the agent says 'no problem' as she tells me it is their policy to only 'ask' for it and submit it to headquarters if an individual discloses it... in other words they call it a 'voluntary basis'.
After three years they raised my rate after each year they lowered it, as I started shopping around for a lower rate and found out how auto insurance really works with their business practices :
Called a State Farm agent in Fairbanks (Dick Randolph) as I requested a quote for one vehicle of basic liability coverage...
This lady asks me how many vehicles I own and if they are registered, then if I was a homeowner, and questioned her judgement on all that over a quote inquiry...She goes on stating that if I were to obtain a State Farm policy, I would have to insure ALL SIX of my vehicles and would also have to obtain a homeowners policy from State Farm at the same time too, as I told her that is discrimination on your part and hung up.....
Called another State Farm agent in Fairbanks (Jim Bradbury) and this person asks me if I had any DUI's in the past 10 years...
Told him how about no moving violations in the past 14 years and no DUI's ever in my 30 years of driving...
I was told sorry but we at State Farm are only accepting high risk drivers with two or more DUI's at this time, told the guy at least he was upfront about it compared to what that lady across town told me 5 minutes ago about her agent's State Farm requirements as this guy is laughing about what I told him, as he says I am tapped out on quota with low risk drivers right now but maybe you can call me in a couple months from now if you're still looking for coverage.
Called a State Farm agent in Anchorage just to see what THEY tell me as my friend in Anchorage has coverage with them there as he gets to pick and choose what he wants and not wanting to cover reference to his seasonal vehicles...
This person quoted me $10 per month higher than what I was paying with my current insurance as she stated there is no you need to cover all six of your vehicles and your home at the same time and there is no you have to have two or more DUI's in order to have a State Farm policy issued in Anchorage...she did state it is up to the agent's discretion of who and what they want to cover though...
As far as the mileage request from the same insurance company I have coverage with, they always ask that everytime I suspend and activate coverage on another vehicle (as I only cover and insure no more than one vehicle at a time)...
I just tell them I drive 2000 to 3000 miles a year, as a couple of times they did ask what the odometer is showing on the vehicle that is going to be insured as I answer I dunno, the same reading as when I bought it, as none of the speedometers on all of my vehicles which are 40 plus years old ever worked to begin with.
That answer always satisfies them as they tell me my rate stays the same and no new changes on my current policy.
I am with a couple posts that had stated they would go elsewhere if the insurance company would require to submit proof of how many miles you driven your vehicle or call you a liar, I would feel offended after doing business with them for a long period of time.
If they want the odometer reading bad enough they can arrive at my residence and annotate the reading.
1970 Ford F250 2WD Sport Custom (Owned April 1996) 390 V8 (23K Rebuilt Mi) C6 Trans (207K Original Mi)
2000 Fleetwood Angler 8ft Cabover
Air Lift 1000(Front)
Air Lift Loadlifter 5000(rear)
Hellwig Front and Rear Sway Bars
Goodyear G171 LT Series(siped)
I have seen the women in my local ins office and if they want to send one to my house to check the odo, that's fine with me. Really, if you lie and have an accident with a ton more miles than you reported two months ago, well, that's a problem. Smog checks read the odo along with dealer work so to lie is real stupid for what little you might save.
Offline
