stomatomoto
Well-known member
Hello, long time no post, but I think I've got something worth de-lurking for here: the bullshit I've been served by Progressive (and now Nationwide too, it seems).
I sold my last bike in August last year, cancelled my Progressive policy I was very content with and had all kinds of different coverage featured with then as well. I kept my auto policy through them the whole time as well. Cut to March 10th, I have just purchased my latest ride, 1988 BMW K75c, and I want to go back to the insurers I've trusted with two previous bikes. I get all the way through the sales call and selecting my features, and the agent tells me it's $1187 up front right there, and that there is no option to pay in installments anymore for new riders. Obviously I can't afford basically half the price of the bike itself all in one sitting, so I accept the most basic liability policy they can give me for the time being.
I doubled checked this already with Progressive, and then Nationwide as well. Apparently Progressive made a "business decision" (words of 3rd or 4th customer service rep/manager I spoke to on the phone) to not provide installment options to "new" riders (wtf, not even a year later and still have auto with them...).
I take massive exception to this, on what I feel are legal grounds, because they are forcing me to accept less coverage and assume more risk because I can't afford a massive premium outright like that. Yes, I am aware I can simply take my business elsewhere, and indeed Markel seems to be both cheaper, offer better coverage, and offers installment plans, so that's already in the works.
HOWEVER, what is concerning to me is the thought of this spreading and becoming an accepted industry practice. I seriously question the legality (even constitutionality) of economically forcing people to accept less financial protection in this state. To that end, I've already submitted a complaint to the California Insurance Commissioner's office; I'm not really sure if that's the best first move or not, but I've never really been a political or regulatory activist in any way, so I'm new to this...
SO, I would like to hear opinions and insights from the legal community as they're represented here, as well as ask for advice in continuing my fight back against these kinds of policies as they stand now. Thanks for reading.
I sold my last bike in August last year, cancelled my Progressive policy I was very content with and had all kinds of different coverage featured with then as well. I kept my auto policy through them the whole time as well. Cut to March 10th, I have just purchased my latest ride, 1988 BMW K75c, and I want to go back to the insurers I've trusted with two previous bikes. I get all the way through the sales call and selecting my features, and the agent tells me it's $1187 up front right there, and that there is no option to pay in installments anymore for new riders. Obviously I can't afford basically half the price of the bike itself all in one sitting, so I accept the most basic liability policy they can give me for the time being.
I doubled checked this already with Progressive, and then Nationwide as well. Apparently Progressive made a "business decision" (words of 3rd or 4th customer service rep/manager I spoke to on the phone) to not provide installment options to "new" riders (wtf, not even a year later and still have auto with them...).
I take massive exception to this, on what I feel are legal grounds, because they are forcing me to accept less coverage and assume more risk because I can't afford a massive premium outright like that. Yes, I am aware I can simply take my business elsewhere, and indeed Markel seems to be both cheaper, offer better coverage, and offers installment plans, so that's already in the works.
HOWEVER, what is concerning to me is the thought of this spreading and becoming an accepted industry practice. I seriously question the legality (even constitutionality) of economically forcing people to accept less financial protection in this state. To that end, I've already submitted a complaint to the California Insurance Commissioner's office; I'm not really sure if that's the best first move or not, but I've never really been a political or regulatory activist in any way, so I'm new to this...
SO, I would like to hear opinions and insights from the legal community as they're represented here, as well as ask for advice in continuing my fight back against these kinds of policies as they stand now. Thanks for reading.