Insurance policies and premium installments

[stomatomoto]

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.

 

[ctwo]

The constitution only limits the powers of government. If McD wanted to charge first time customers $10 for their plain burger the constitution is not going to stop them (although insurance is supposed to be regulated).

I find the "new" rider category is just as unfair when premiums for those that do not already have a MC policy is generally higher as well.

I take the one-time payment because it usually saves me in the long run.

 

[afm199]

Insurance is not a legal right, and payment schedules are a convenience offered to customers, not a legal right.

 

[ctwo]

Insurance is not a legal right, it is a legal requirement, and it should be as well regulated so pricing is fair, balanced, and affordable. Legislation forcing the purchase of a service should remove that service from the capitalist business model and the government should be posting premium schedules like they do the tax rate.

 

[dravnx]

Yeah
And I have to wear a helmet so the gubmint should tell the retailers how much to charge.

Insurance is a legal requirement if you want to exercise the privilege of driving. Don't like the price of insurance, that's easy, don't drive.

 

[MikeGyver]

They did not force you to buy a motorcycle. They are not forcing you to accept less coverage and assume higher risk. You bought the motorcycle and do not have the means to pay the full price of insurance up front. You are still able to sell the bike and avoid insurance on it altogether.

An insurance company is not required to allow you to make monthly payments. The constitution has nothing to do with anything you mentioned.

 

[ctwo]

Yeah
And I have to wear a helmet so the gubmint should tell the retailers how much to charge.

Insurance is a legal requirement if you want to exercise the privilege of driving. Don't like the price of insurance, that's easy, don't drive.

There should be an affordable "gov" plan, including a government helmiot class. These would satisfy the minimum legal requirements and be heavily regulated.

Of course companies can sell luxury plans and models at whatever price they can get.

I'm not sure why all the insurance companies have not just by coincidence started raising premiums like 12% every year, and why we aren't being charged like $10k a year yet. It's not like everyone would just opt out of driving...arty

 

[dravnx]

That's what we need, more bureaucracy and government control of our lives.

 

[Schnellbandit]

As a consumer you have leverage although its rather limited. Whatever company you have other insurance with can sometimes give you discounts for added coverage but they aren't going to offer it.

What I found over the decades is that when you cancel insurance make a point to explain why. When selling a bike and later adding one on, the agents have noted my previous sale and cancellation so its not like I just decided to dump them. I don't know how much difference it makes but getting reasonable rates and good coverage hasn't been a problem.

Of course what is reasonable to me might not be to you. DMV registration? Now there is another story.

 

[ctwo]

That's what we need, more bureaucracy and government control of our lives.

I'm not advocating for more. That of which is already there just needs proper implementation. Not unlike the ACA.

 

[matjam]

I paid $3500 the first year I had my Ducati Panigale. It's dropped a bit now.

Honestly though, I wouldn't bother getting insurance for the replacement of the vehicle if it was valued < 4k. Just get good third party liability insurance and third party underinsured cover and be done.