OT: Has anyone else been paying attention to auto insurance premiums?

[Sullivan]

April 10, 2024, 6:29 PM EDT
By Rob Wile

Wednesday's inflation report showed consumer price growth continues to drift higher.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported price growth accelerated to 3.5% in March, from 3.2% in February.

Few categories had as big a jump year on year than auto insurance, which soared 22% from March 2023, the most significant year-on-year jump in that category since 1976.

And over the last few years, average auto insurance rates have surged 43%.

As of April, the national average cost of car insurance is $2,314 per year for full coverage and $644 per year for the bare minimum, according to Bankrate.

That works out to about $193 a month for full coverage and $54 for minimum coverage.

A host of factors determine how much insurance companies charge drivers, but the cost of nearly all of them seem to be increasing.
One major factor is simply the rising cost of modern vehicles themselves. Today, a new vehicle costs about $10,000 more than it did before the pandemic. Blame supply-chain issues that drove up the cost of vehicle parts, increased labor costs and customer demand, which has naturally pushed prices upward.

The increasing sophistication of the technology in today’s vehicles also contributes to rising costs, said Robert Passmore, department vice president of personal lines at American Property Casualty Insurance Association. Cameras and sensors, which are used for various driver-assistance technologies, like emergency braking, automated parking and blind-spot monitoring, require parts that are more expensive to replace. They're also subject to higher labor costs, Passmore said.

More complex and expensive repairs are also taking longer, and that shows up as higher vehicle costs, Passmore said. And worker shortages have resulted in higher pay for technicians.

Consumer prices moved higher in March. Auto insurance costs were a major reason.

Drivers in the U.S. are now paying nearly $200 a month on average for full coverage.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Obliviax]

One would assume many of the "sophisticated technologies" would lead to fewer accidents. Things like lane assist, blind spot detection, and forward collision learning should lower insurance costs, not increase them. I read an article stating that "self driving mode", despite the media, is hundreds of times safer than human driving. the point is that it eliminates distracted drivers (mobile phone, kids, radio stations) and drivers who are under the influence (or just tired).

Parts availability has been a problem and hasn't caught up since the shortages.

It doesn't seem to add up.

 

[Obliviax]

BTW, I saw this today too. I am not sure why these increases are higher than inflation but suspect it has to do with supply chain and salary increases.

 

[voltz99]

Has anyone paid attention to healthcare premiums and out of pocket costs? Costs way up m coverage down, copay way up. Let me know when affordable care gets affordable.

 

[Fletchster1]

No such thing as a free lunch; people that can pay are paying for the ones that can't (or aren't forced to) pay. We need to return to sanity in this country.

 

[tboyer]

We pay in so many ways for our wildly inefficient, broken health care system.

Go to Europe and you see what it means to have health costs 1/2 to 1/3 of what they are in the United States. A baguette in a Paris bakery costs $1.20 because the bakery doesn't have employee health care costs or super-inflated workers comp insurance. You can rent a car (granted, usually it's a small car) for as little as $15-20 a day because the car rental companies don't have to carry super-expensive liability insurance.

Treating a broken leg in the US is now well over $100,000 and headed for $200k. So just a run of the mill car accident with moderate injuries gets to $1 million in medical care costs pretty quick.

This is not new, American health care has been in (financial) crisis for 20 years now. But it's starting to really dig into our standard of living. Health care is literally eating us out of house and home.

 

[tboyer]

One would assume many of the "sophisticated technologies" would lead to fewer accidents. Things like lane assist, blind spot detection, and forward collision learning should lower insurance costs, not increase them. I read an article stating that "self driving mode", despite the media, is hundreds of times safer than human driving. the point is that it eliminates distracted drivers (mobile phone, kids, radio stations) and drivers who are under the influence (or just tired).

Parts availability has been a problem and hasn't caught up since the shortages.

It doesn't seem to add up.

It's a paradox but I think it makes sense. For 50 years the US has tried to make cars injury proof and idiot proof instead of requiring drivers to be safe. And in the interest of safer highways and roadways, we've continually put up more red lights and eliminated merges and turn-on-reds and anything that requires an intelligent driver's attention.

Essentially we've dumbed down driving, so we got dumb drivers. Meanwhile we added huge video screens to cars so drivers can amuse themselves with things other than driving -- while they're driving. That doesn't seem smart to me.

I've had a beef with red lights for a long time. They're really not safe -- red lights lead to gruesome injuries, head-on and t-bone type accidents at high speed. Europe has eliminated millions of red lights in favor of traffic circles.

European drivers have to actually have their eyes on the road instead of sitting at red lights watching Youtube. It cuts down on injury accidents and also gets people to their destination a lot faster than stopping for 2 minutes every 500 feet like in the USA. But every time you try to put in a traffic circle in the US you have stupid people complaining because merging is so difficult and they can't figure it out. Dumb drivers.

 

[Obliviax]

It's a paradox but I think it makes sense. For 50 years the US has tried to make cars injury proof and idiot proof instead of requiring drivers to be safe. And in the interest of safer highways and roadways, we've continually put up more red lights and eliminated merges and turn-on-reds and anything that requires an intelligent driver's attention.

Essentially we've dumbed down driving, so we got dumb drivers. Meanwhile we added huge video screens to cars so drivers can amuse themselves with things other than driving -- while they're driving. That doesn't seem smart to me.

I've had a beef with red lights for a long time. They're really not safe -- red lights lead to gruesome injuries, head-on and t-bone type accidents at high speed. Europe has eliminated millions of red lights in favor of traffic circles.

European drivers have to actually have their eyes on the road instead of sitting at red lights watching Youtube. It cuts down on injury accidents and also gets people to their destination a lot faster than stopping for 2 minutes every 500 feet like in the USA. But every time you try to put in a traffic circle in the US you have stupid people complaining because merging is so difficult and they can't figure it out. Dumb drivers.

Great points. Of course, we know that communities put up a red light or stop sign when there is an accident but when that is no longer needed over time (technology, traffic flows, etc.) those things never get taken down. I am always frustrated with four say stops (which are rarely needed) and having to stop at a red light at 5am where there isn't a car around for miles. With today's technology and the move to save on energy, there has to be a low cost better way to manage intersections.

Regardless, you make a great point.

 

[91Joe95]

Let's not forget theft, breaking into cars, and vandalism of cars that has become legal in multiple states.

 

[slykens]

While my big car insurance jump came last year (about 10%) it went down about 4% this year with my renewal this month. I was floored by that.

Anyway, IMO a big part of it is that car repair costs are insane in some/many cases now. The new LED headlights used by the Germans are at least $3,000 for one and a friend of a friend recently was quoted over $6,000 just for a headlight assembly on a new X5!

A simple front end crash that probably would have been $8-10k five years ago is now $15-20k to repair.

 

[Obliviax]

Let's not forget theft, breaking into cars, and vandalism of cars that has become legal in multiple states.

Great point. The Korean makers have gotten lit up on stolen cars. Somebody posted a video of how to jack these and it takes about two seconds.

the other are the new key fobs with push to start:

• People leave the fobs in the car
• People take the fobs with them but it never disconnects
• Jackers make key fob simulators and just drive around hitting the unlock button until they see lights flash
• Car jacker can start the car and drive away but can't restart it once they get away. however, they joy ride and abandon it or take it to a garage to strip it.

[KH Explains] Are Hyundai, Kia really responsible for thefts in US?

South Korean automakers Hyundai Motor Company and its sister firm Kia have been facing a public backlash and multiple lawsuits in the United States as the number of vehicle thefts among certain models lacking immobilizers surged after videos of young men stealing the cars went viral on social...

www.koreaherald.com

 

[Rip_E_2_Joe_PA]

One would assume many of the "sophisticated technologies" would lead to fewer accidents. Things like lane assist, blind spot detection, and forward collision learning should lower insurance costs, not increase them. I read an article stating that "self driving mode", despite the media, is hundreds of times safer than human driving. the point is that it eliminates distracted drivers (mobile phone, kids, radio stations) and drivers who are under the influence (or just tired).

Parts availability has been a problem and hasn't caught up since the shortages.

It doesn't seem to add up.

It doesn't. Even the simplistic changes, side assist and rear and side vision have made a huge impact on collision reduction. I can attest personally to that. KISS design works well.

Also, remote work lowers milage required of many workers reducing opportunity for accidents. It doesn't take forensic accountants to follow the money in this instance.

 

[tboyer]

Great points. Of course, we know that communities put up a red light or stop sign when there is an accident but when that is no longer needed over time (technology, traffic flows, etc.) those things never get taken down. I am always frustrated with four say stops (which are rarely needed) and having to stop at a red light at 5am where there isn't a car around for miles. With today's technology and the move to save on energy, there has to be a low cost better way to manage intersections.

Regardless, you make a great point.

In Pa., unlike other states, red lights even on major highways are controlled by the local borough or township, and the state highway dept gets no say. So basically every time Wawa opens a store, they go to the local borough council and get their own stop light. PennDOT spends billions of dollars on highways and then can't stop the local governments from turning those highways into parking lots.

Where I live in Delco (just like in the city of Phila) there are multi-stage, time-sucking red lights that were set up 40 years ago for a factory or school that is no longer operating. They never get removed or even re-timed to account for changing traffic patterns. You'd think not wasting your citizens' time, helping them get to their families at a decent hour would be a high priority for local government, but you'd be wrong.

The other problem is that the local government entities mostly worry these days about getting sued because litigation is so obscenely expensive. So 20 years ago, you probably remember, red lights would routinely go to blinker from about 11 p.m. to 5 a.m., but they don't do that any more because they don't want to get sued if someone has an accident.

 

[Obliviax]

In Pa., unlike other states, red lights even on major highways are controlled by the local borough or township, and the state highway dept gets no say. So basically every time Wawa opens a store, they go to the local borough council and get their own stop light. PennDOT spends billions of dollars on highways and then can't stop the local governments from turning those highways into parking lots.

Where I live in Delco (just like in the city of Phila) there are multi-stage, time-sucking red lights that were set up 40 years ago for a factory or school that is no longer operating. They never get removed or even re-timed to account for changing traffic patterns. You'd think not wasting your citizens' time, helping them get to their families at a decent hour would be a high priority for local government, but you'd be wrong.

The other problem is that the local government entities mostly worry these days about getting sued because litigation is so obscenely expensive. So 20 years ago, you probably remember, red lights would routinely go to blinker from about 11 p.m. to 5 a.m., but they don't do that any more because they don't want to get sued if someone has an accident.

Yep.

I don't understand why someone hasn't created a motion-sensitive redlight with some AI/Analytics behind queuing theory on when the light turns to let cross-traffic have a chance. In Vietnam, the traffic light is just a "suggestion".

An acquaintance of mine is embedding smoke/CO2 and video cameras into can light replacements.

 

[slykens]

Yep.

I don't understand why someone hasn't created a motion-sensitive redlight with some AI/Analytics behind queuing theory on when the light turns to let cross-traffic have a chance. In Vietnam, the traffic light is just a "suggestion".

An acquaintance of mine is embedding smoke/CO2 and video cameras into can light replacements.

Such a beast exists. Lots of lights have cameras that can count cars and cycle based on that. It’s not really AI, per se, but a good use of AI would be to network lights and let the computer figure out the optimal sequencing for the situation. I’m sure someone’s working on that software considering many years ago PennDOT spent a million dollars to “synchronize” the lights on North Atherton and it seems they got nothing but jams for it.

 

[fastlax16]

One would assume many of the "sophisticated technologies" would lead to fewer accidents. Things like lane assist, blind spot detection, and forward collision learning should lower insurance costs, not increase them. I read an article stating that "self driving mode", despite the media, is hundreds of times safer than human driving. the point is that it eliminates distracted drivers (mobile phone, kids, radio stations) and drivers who are under the influence (or just tired).

Parts availability has been a problem and hasn't caught up since the shortages.

It doesn't seem to add up.

What used to be simple repairs are significantly more expensive now when accidents do occur. Repainting a front bumper on a car with sensors built is now requires full recalibration of the sensors. Ditto for windshields with integrated tech.

Parts with newer tech are also more expensive. The taillight on a 2023 escalade costs $1500.

Rear lamps. Tail lamps.. 2023 Cadillac Escalade Premium Luxury Sport Utility 6.2L EcoTec3 V8 A/T RWD | GM Parts Bin

2023 Cadillac Escalade Premium Luxury Sport Utility 6.2L EcoTec3 V8 A/T RWD Rear lamps. Tail lamps. Center. Lower. Upper.

www.gmpartsbin.com

Taillight for a 2013 Escalade is $800-1000

REAR LAMPS. COMBINATION LAMPS.. 2013 Cadillac Escalade Premium Sport Utility 6.2L Vortec V8 FLEX A/T AWD | GM Parts Bin

2013 Cadillac Escalade Premium Sport Utility 6.2L Vortec V8 FLEX A/T AWD REAR LAMPS. COMBINATION LAMPS. 1st design. 2nd design. ESCALADE. w/apperance pkg. w/o appearance pkg.

www.gmpartsbin.com

Taillight for a 2003 Escalade is $160

2003 Cadillac Escalade Base Sport Utility 5.3L Vortec V8 A/T AWD Lamp asm-tail *marked print - 15044524 | GM Parts Bin

Lamp asm-tail *marked print. 2003 Cadillac Escalade Base Sport Utility 5.3L Vortec V8 A/T AWD. Genuine Cadillac Part - 15044524 (15079079). Ships from GM Parts Bin

www.gmpartsbin.com

 

[SLUPSU]

April 10, 2024, 6:29 PM EDT
By Rob Wile

Wednesday's inflation report showed consumer price growth continues to drift higher.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported price growth accelerated to 3.5% in March, from 3.2% in February.

Few categories had as big a jump year on year than auto insurance, which soared 22% from March 2023, the most significant year-on-year jump in that category since 1976.

And over the last few years, average auto insurance rates have surged 43%.

As of April, the national average cost of car insurance is $2,314 per year for full coverage and $644 per year for the bare minimum, according to Bankrate.

That works out to about $193 a month for full coverage and $54 for minimum coverage.

A host of factors determine how much insurance companies charge drivers, but the cost of nearly all of them seem to be increasing.
One major factor is simply the rising cost of modern vehicles themselves. Today, a new vehicle costs about $10,000 more than it did before the pandemic. Blame supply-chain issues that drove up the cost of vehicle parts, increased labor costs and customer demand, which has naturally pushed prices upward.

The increasing sophistication of the technology in today’s vehicles also contributes to rising costs, said Robert Passmore, department vice president of personal lines at American Property Casualty Insurance Association. Cameras and sensors, which are used for various driver-assistance technologies, like emergency braking, automated parking and blind-spot monitoring, require parts that are more expensive to replace. They're also subject to higher labor costs, Passmore said.

More complex and expensive repairs are also taking longer, and that shows up as higher vehicle costs, Passmore said. And worker shortages have resulted in higher pay for technicians.

Consumer prices moved higher in March. Auto insurance costs were a major reason.

Drivers in the U.S. are now paying nearly $200 a month on average for full coverage.

www.nbcnews.com

It's very company dependent, I renewed back in Jan and my auto went up 21% and I had to raise my comp deductible to get that price. There were much cheaper rates available in the market, less than what I was paying but because the homeowner's is bundled with auto, I stayed with my carrier to avoid an even bigger $ increase on the homeowners which stayed flat this year. I thought about getting coverage for home/auto from different companies but decided to keep Auto Owners because I couldn't get umbrella coverage if I split my coverage.

 

[Sullivan]

It's very company dependent, I renewed back in Jan and my auto went up 21% and I had to raise my comp deductible to get that price. There were much cheaper rates available in the market, less than what I was paying but because the homeowner's is bundled with auto, I stayed with my carrier to avoid an even bigger $ increase on the homeowners which stayed flat this year. I thought about getting coverage for home/auto from different companies but decided to keep Auto Owners because I couldn't get umbrella coverage if I split my coverage.

The average was 22% for the year, so you were close to average on your increase.

 

[Jerry]

The last few years have been brutal for both car and medical insurance for reasons highlighted in this thread plus other factors too.

At peak cost way back in the day, like 20 years ago, we paid $500 a month with three cars and three teens at a time on our policy. I can't even imagine what that number would look like today. Absolutely prohibitive for all but rich people.

To put the fear of God in our kids, we told them, you get in an accident that's your fault, or you get a ticket that causes our insurance to go up, you can kiss your driving days goodbye until you move out and can pay your own bills. That concentrated their minds, and they all made it a point not to do either of those things.

My wife and I had a pleasant shock a few years ago when we moved from a suburb of Baltimore to a nice quiet town in Pennsylvania. Our car insurance immediately decreased from $250 a month to $60. We're now at $70, which is not bad at all.

Personally, I don't buy cars to make fashion statements or groove on new technology. I just want to get from Point A to Point B reliably. Therefore, I'd happily ditch all the extras in a heartbeat. Hell, I'd be getting manual windows if they were still on the market.

The problem is, you can't find slimmed-down new vehicles anymore. The manufacturers force you to buy all the gizmos that are hiking prices and insurance rates. In fact, it's getting to the point where you have to be fairly well-off to even shop for a new car. It doesn't need to be this way and shouldn't.

 

[ryoder1]

I think my auto premium went up about 25% on this latest 6 month cycle. No trigger like an accident, new car, ticket nothing. Just pure rate increase due to whatever costs these insurers now have. To me that type of price hike is absolutely ridiculous. My premium is still pretty low and that is why I am with this insurer in the first place but I will shop around if they pull this again in a few months.

 

[tboyer]

Such a beast exists. Lots of lights have cameras that can count cars and cycle based on that. It’s not really AI, per se, but a good use of AI would be to network lights and let the computer figure out the optimal sequencing for the situation. I’m sure someone’s working on that software considering many years ago PennDOT spent a million dollars to “synchronize” the lights on North Atherton and it seems they got nothing but jams for it.

Traffic engineering is underfunded at all levels of government and technology moves at a glacial pace. Everything having to do with state and federal highways (which means most major urban streets as well) is regulated by thousands of pages of state and federal rules. You can't use new technology unless it complies with the rules, and the rules evolve very, very slowly. Certification of new equipment takes decades.

The majority of traffic lights in the USA are still 1st generation -- basically 110-year-old technology. Primitive electric motors turn gears which turn switches to put the lights through their intervals. We have supercomputers in our pockets -- these signals have almost no logic to speak of and they take up metal cabinets the size of a refrigerator -- that's how old the tech is. They have no sensors, they have no capability to connect to a network, they can't change mode at times of day because they don't even have a clock. They have no capability to synch with the next traffic light 100 feet up the road.

It should be illegal to put lights like this up. We're supposed to be concerned about wasting fuel and global warming. But we have lines of 2 ton cars put on their brakes to stop at a a traffic light (calculate the energy wasted every time this happens) when there isn't even another vehicle trying to cross. Millions of cars every day braking to zero for absolutely no reason, and then idling for 30 seconds to a minute. It's so stupid. Most of us have this experience every day -- some of us many times of day. It wastes our time, it wastes gas, it puts millions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere for zero benefit.

I don't know why people put up with it. It's just one of those things that is so much a part of every day life you don't think about it as a problem, I guess.

 

[tboyer]

I think my auto premium went up about 25% on this latest 6 month cycle. No trigger like an accident, new car, ticket nothing. Just pure rate increase due to whatever costs these insurers now have. To me that type of price hike is absolutely ridiculous. My premium is still pretty low and that is why I am with this insurer in the first place but I will shop around if they pull this again in a few months.

Somebody, I think the Post, had a really interesting story about newer model cars that are always connected to a network like Onstar.

Apparently a lot of these cars (from multiple brands, not just GM) actually rat on you -- they report your speed and location, they report every time you do a hard break -- and that data is shared with insurance companies.

So some people's rates are going up without getting a ticket or accident, and they don't even know their car is ratting on them. Insurance companies pay a lot for this data so car companies are happy to oblige. The article talked about this guy in Florida who owned a Cadillac and his rates doubled -- and when he got quotes from other insurers, they quoted him the same thing because they had the same data, all reported by Onstar/GM. Even though his driving record is perfect, he was downrated because of hard braking, which the insurance companies see as a sign of an unsafe driver. The guy is suing because he says he was never properly informed this would happen -- if he knew, he never would have bought the car.

Anyway if you own a new car you may want to check on it. The article suggested the practice is widespread. I have a 2022 Toyota so it is one more reason not to put the Toyota app on my phone. Apparently the car manufacturer app is one method of reporting driving data.

 

[ryoder1]

Traffic engineering is underfunded at all levels of government and technology moves at a glacial pace. Everything having to do with state and federal highways (which means most major urban streets as well) is regulated by thousands of pages of state and federal rules. You can't use new technology unless it complies with the rules, and the rules evolve very, very slowly. Certification of new equipment takes decades.

The majority of traffic lights in the USA are still 1st generation -- basically 110-year-old technology. Primitive electric motors turn gears which turn switches to put the lights through their intervals. We have supercomputers in our pockets -- these signals have almost no logic to speak of and they take up metal cabinets the size of a refrigerator -- that's how old the tech is. They have no sensors, they have no capability to connect to a network, they can't change mode at times of day because they don't even have a clock. They have no capability to synch with the next traffic light 100 feet up the road.

It should be illegal to put lights like this up. We're supposed to be concerned about wasting fuel and global warming. But we have lines of 2 ton cars put on their brakes to stop at a a traffic light (calculate the energy wasted every time this happens) when there isn't even another vehicle trying to cross. Millions of cars every day braking to zero for absolutely no reason, and then idling for 30 seconds to a minute. It's so stupid. Most of us have this experience every day -- some of us many times of day. It wastes our time, it wastes gas, it puts millions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere for zero benefit.

I don't know why people put up with it. It's just one of those things that is so much a part of every day life you don't think about it as a problem, I guess.

I am painfully aware of it every time I drive. It is obvious the traffic light system is not modern. But what can you do, ignore the light? Wastes everyone's time waiting at these lights way too long.

 

[ryoder1]

Somebody, I think the Post, had a really interesting story about newer model cars that are always connected to a network like Onstar.

Apparently a lot of these cars (from multiple brands, not just GM) actually rat on you -- they report your speed and location, they report every time you do a hard break -- and that data is shared with insurance companies.

So some people's rates are going up without getting a ticket or accident, and they don't even know their car is ratting on them. Insurance companies pay a lot for this data so car companies are happy to oblige. The article talked about this guy in Florida who owned a Cadillac and his rates doubled -- and when he got quotes from other insurers, they quoted him the same thing because they had the same data, all reported by Onstar/GM. Even though his driving record is perfect, he was downrated because of hard braking, which the insurance companies see as a sign of an unsafe driver. The guy is suing because he says he was never properly informed this would happen -- if he knew, he never would have bought the car.

Anyway if you own a new car you may want to check on it. The article suggested the practice is widespread. I have a 2022 Toyota so it is one more reason not to put the Toyota app on my phone. Apparently the car manufacturer app is one method of reporting driving data.

LOL! Both my cars are 20+ years old! That is not the reason for me but very interesting. To me this is all about insurance companies being greedy and screwing their customers knowing it is a big pain to switch carriers.

Look at it this way....can you imagine some everyday grocery items going up 25%??? Do you think Walmart or Costco would let some supplier just jack their cost up on them forcing Walmart or Costco to pass that on to the consumer. No way. Those retailers stand for great value, any supplier stupid enough to try to pull that crap would be kicked out.

 

[SR108]

One would assume many of the "sophisticated technologies" would lead to fewer accidents. Things like lane assist, blind spot detection, and forward collision learning should lower insurance costs, not increase them. I read an article stating that "self driving mode", despite the media, is hundreds of times safer than human driving. the point is that it eliminates distracted drivers (mobile phone, kids, radio stations) and drivers who are under the influence (or just tired).

Parts availability has been a problem and hasn't caught up since the shortages.

It doesn't seem to add up.

As the replacement cost of a vehicle increases, so does insurance.

 

[LMTLION]

My own premiums have been stable for years. I live in PA and use Erie insurance. They are the best of the best. I occasionally quote out and nobody can ever touch them. And no, I don’t work for Erie insurance. I work in Healthcare!

 

[Nbergbuck]

In Pa., unlike other states, red lights even on major highways are controlled by the local borough or township, and the state highway dept gets no say. So basically every time Wawa opens a store, they go to the local borough council and get their own stop light. PennDOT spends billions of dollars on highways and then can't stop the local governments from turning those highways into parking lots.

Where I live in Delco (just like in the city of Phila) there are multi-stage, time-sucking red lights that were set up 40 years ago for a factory or school that is no longer operating. They never get removed or even re-timed to account for changing traffic patterns. You'd think not wasting your citizens' time, helping them get to their families at a decent hour would be a high priority for local government, but you'd be wrong.

The other problem is that the local government entities mostly worry these days about getting sued because litigation is so obscenely expensive. So 20 years ago, you probably remember, red lights would routinely go to blinker from about 11 p.m. to 5 a.m., but they don't do that any more because they don't want to get sued if someone has an accident.

There would be far less litigation if loser paid legal expenses.

 

[AvalonJohn]

Has anyone paid attention to healthcare premiums and out of pocket costs? Costs way up m coverage down, copay way up. Let me know when affordable care gets affordable.

I was just saying how much HC has gone up. Higher deductible and co-pays. I was going to retire but HC has me continuing to work.

 

[AWS1022]

LOL! Both my cars are 20+ years old! That is not the reason for me but very interesting. To me this is all about insurance companies being greedy and screwing their customers knowing it is a big pain to switch carriers.

Look at it this way....can you imagine some everyday grocery items going up 25%??? Do you think Walmart or Costco would let some supplier just jack their cost up on them forcing Walmart or Costco to pass that on to the consumer. No way. Those retailers stand for great value, any supplier stupid enough to try to pull that crap would be kicked out.

Yes, the old greedy corporation idea. Pretty funny….if that’s the case then insurance companies aren’t very good at it since nearly every insurance company in the country is losing money and many are going out of business. But it must just be their greed and it has nothing to do with the outrageous rise in costs of repairs, horrible weather, incompetent regulation by many states, and ridiculous court settlements that are driving their costs through the roof.

 

[blair10]

Yes, the old greedy corporation idea. Pretty funny….if that’s the case then insurance companies aren’t very good at it since nearly every insurance company in the country is losing money and many are going out of business. But it must just be their greed and it has nothing to do with the outrageous rise in costs of repairs, horrible weather, incompetent regulation by many states, and ridiculous court settlements that are driving their costs through the roof.

If you look at the 10 largest Insurance companies, 80% were profitable last year with many raking in billions in net income. Shed no tears for greedy corporations.

10 Biggest Insurance Companies

With Berkshire Hathaway leading the pack, these are the 10 biggest insurance companies by revenue.

www.investopedia.com

 

[psualt]

This reminds me of what a guy was telling me a few months ago about an auto body shop that is wildly profitable. Their goal is to drag their feet and delay any work to repair a car in hopes that it will be totaled. Many of these claims are borderline and, I was told, become cash cows as the storage fees they receive pile up. This often surpasses several thousand dollars. There is essentially no incentive to keep costs low. My thought, you know this has to effect premiums as they can’t be the only ones working the system.

 

[bdgan]

My auto insurance premiums are paid every 6 months.

May 2023 $765
November 2023 $846
May 2024 $891

+ 16.5% year over year.

I don't know how they calculate CPI. I don't believe anybody is artificially suppressing the inflation data for political reasons but I do believe that their formulas don't pick up a lot of things. Insurance is probably one of them.

 

[bdgan]

BTW, I saw this today too. I am not sure why these increases are higher than inflation but suspect it has to do with supply chain and salary increases.

According to the BLS median fast food wages are up nearly 40% from 2019-2024.

 

[Obliviax]

If you look at the 10 largest Insurance companies, 80% were profitable last year with many raking in billions in net income. Shed no tears for greedy corporations.

10 Biggest Insurance Companies

With Berkshire Hathaway leading the pack, these are the 10 biggest insurance companies by revenue.

www.investopedia.com

yeah..I hate insurance companies. We annually put our insurance out for bids. LIke internet and cable TV providers, they just keep increasing the fee until you tell them you are out. suddenly, they come up with a "limited time offer just for you ...." narrative. It is a pain in the ass to do, but that is why they keep creeping the prices up.

 

[Obliviax]

As the replacement cost of a vehicle increases, so does insurance.

Agreed, but again, if the accident avoidance stuff isn't cost-justified, why have it? Most just avoid fender benders as many fatalities aren't going to be avoided. Lane-keeping assist and blind spot detection are very valuable and aren't very expensive. I just priced out a new Buick Encore for $25k with all of that stuff. And, yes, I know Buick is trying to move from being an old persons car to hot chicks.

 

[91Joe95]

And, yes, I know Buick is trying to move from being an old persons car to hot chicks.

Congratulations on your transition.

 

[Lion84]

I work in Insurance and we have raised rates up to 25% or more this year for the more poor performers but all are getting increases - Commercial Insurance not personnel and the reasons why:

1) higher costs to repair vehicles - no such thing as a fender bender anymore
2) Huge rise in claims costs and settlement - more "nuclear" verdicts
3) More accidents due to distracted drivers
4) Increase in medical costs for injured victims

and some states are pulling the rest of the country down specifically - Florida, Texas and LA along with California.

If you missed it to show how bad it has gotten State Farm was just downgraded from an A Rated carrier to B Rated which is a HUGE deal in the Insurance world - thy said they are pulling out of CA Homeowners biz - they left Florida years ago.

 

[Obliviax]

I work in Insurance and we have raised rates up to 25% or more this year for the more poor performers but all are getting increases - Commercial Insurance not personnel and the reasons why:

1) higher costs to repair vehicles - no such thing as a fender bender anymore
2) Huge rise in claims costs and settlement - more "nuclear" verdicts
3) More accidents due to distracted drivers
4) Increase in medical costs for injured victims

and some states are pulling the rest of the country down specifically - Florida, Texas and LA along with California.

If you missed it to show how bad it has gotten State Farm was just downgraded from an A Rated carrier to B Rated which is a HUGE deal in the Insurance world - thy said they are pulling out of CA Homeowners biz - they left Florida years ago.

thanks. a few comments/questions

• you conflate homeowners with car. I think those are two separate issues. I think you were trying to make two separate points but just wanted to define that.
• Agreed on the "fender benders" but the tech will make them more expensive but should be far less for cars equipped with notifications that you are getting too close to another car while parking, lane assist, forward collision, cross-traffic alert, automatic emergency brake and the rest. Net net should be better.
• Does the industry give discounts for having these tools on your car?
• I see a lot of apps that now monitor your driving and give you discounts. Legit or not?

The nuclear verdicts are out of control as are medial costs when the driver of one car is liable for others.

 

[SLUPSU]

thanks. a few comments/questions

• you conflate homeowners with car. I think those are two separate issues. I think you were trying to make two separate points but just wanted to define that.
• Agreed on the "fender benders" but the tech will make them more expensive but should be far less for cars equipped with notifications that you are getting too close to another car while parking, lane assist, forward collision, cross-traffic alert, automatic emergency brake and the rest. Net net should be better.
• Does the industry give discounts for having these tools on your car?
• I see a lot of apps that now monitor your driving and give you discounts. Legit or not?

The nuclear verdicts are out of control as are medial costs when the driver of one car is liable for others.

That seems like a leap of logic, that all the safety features must/should overcome distracted and bad driving. Isn't it entirely possible that all the safety features are helping and without them the accident numbers could be much worse?

 

[Obliviax]

That seems like a leap of logic, that all the safety features must/should overcome distracted and bad driving. Isn't it entirely possible that all the safety features are helping and without them the accident numbers could be much worse?

yeah...I think that is the point. What is the benefit of something like "blind spot detection" if the cost of the feature is more than the risk associated with not having it?