I am 48 years old. I've had one ticket and one accident since I began driving at age 17. I got laid off my job and was unemployed for 10 months. During this time, my credit rating suffered. However, I am a careful driver and a mature adult. I live in Dallas and take the DART train to work, and drive generally on the weekend. "Why Chat" seems to have some insurance rating information that others on the board may not be privileged to. If so, give us web links or actual raw data or facts why my poor credit should be the determinant for a large increase in my auto insurance premium. An individual's credit rating is too subjective and volatile a factor to be included in insurance rating. It is too gray an area to be decisive, if only because of the sloppy recordkeeping and inaccurate information by the three big credit bureaus. Driving habits and driving records, however, are clear cut. Again, I say that insurance companies will do anything suspect to make a buck. Anybody can take data and make it say what they want it to. Just ask the former Enron executives. If their statistics are fair and honest, why should they hide their methods. The gloves are off on this issue with me. If I had a bad driving record, it would not be an issue.
Although it looks like you're sort of agreeing with me, I'd like to further point out that drivers can only cause accidents when using cars (or other motor vehicles). -ingenue
Actually, you don't have to have insurance...you have to have proof of "financial responsibilty". so, if you can pony up $50,000 for a bond to the state or are a self-insurer like Hertz, Avis, GE etc. then you don't need to pay for insurance. ;-) But if you live in our world then you need to find a company that doesn't do credit checks. BTW someone menitoned GEICO. The do indeed do a check (at least they told me they were) for auto and renters/homeowners insurance. The home rep told me what they were actually looking in was a claims database that is shared be insurance companies. I guess that means if you have a habit of getting your car "stolen" every 5 months then they'd catch on. I don't think they were pulling scores because I never saw inquiries.
No breeze,I do not now work in the Ins. Industry,although I am still licensed in all aspects of that field, as well as several other professions. I am not agreeing with their underwriting,just observing that THEY believe it. Yes statistics lie- as per the statistician who drowned in an average of 18 inches of water.
Oh good! Whew! I was worried there for a minute, LOL. No wonder you know so much about so many subjects!
what i have been told by progressive,hartford ect who i broker for is, it is not really the claim frequency.. they feel like the guy with great credit is more likey to minimize the claim when someone who is up to there eyeballs in debt will try to get everypenny.. i do not agree with credit scoring for auto insurance to me it is a form of red lining. not wanting to insure vehicles in the poorer communitys. but the only way it will cease is if enough people complain and that you must do to your director of insurance in your state and if that state is illinois the govenor to because our director is appointed by the govenor not elected
GEICO and all companies, pull several records besides credit - CLUE is the claims database, then they pull MVR, of course. They do not need permission to pull these. I posted before, they have different statements/disclosures for different states, Some of them do not sound like questions - but, YOU CAN SAY NO. If you do not say no they will pull your credit report. Even if it sounds like they are saying "We ARE definitely going to pull your credit report." Interrupt and say no. I was not working for them last year, so I don't know what they did then. Insurance companies change their policies and procedures like I change shoes. Next week it may be different. Right now, you can get their auto policy without having credit pulled. If your driving record is good, you will get preferred rates anyway. But you have to say no when they read you that credit disclosure.
1*right : That's where the insurance should be. 2*Mandatory Ins. is because of the way it is enforced and administered.No other business has the the benefit of a captive cliental. 3*This doesn't matter if you insure the driver instead.
I'd disagree about "the guy with great credit" paragraph. People with good credit tend to be fiscally responsible, know their rights, and to *not* let any pennies get away. Ever wonder why rich people can be so cheap? It's because that's how they got rich in the first place. The part about not wanting to insure in poorer communities, though, is spot-on correct, IMHO. People in poorer communities (who can often be identified by also having poor credit) are more likely to be victims of theft or vandalism, more likely to live in apartment complexes with parking lots (higher collision risk), and be surrounded by other drivers that have beat-up, late model cars that their owners don't care about banging up some more. -ingenue
I have had GEICO for many years. I had them even before I ever began thinking about addressing my credit woes. I have had great rates. Geico told me they pull credit reports only to verify address for insurance. When I first signed with GEICO My scores were somewhere in the high 400's
1, 3. But if you only insure the driver, not the car, then you're not including the claim risks associated with the kind of vehicle a driver chooses to drive. Some *autos* have higher incidences of theft. Some *autos* are more likely to sustain more expensive damage than others in a collision. Some *autos* are less safe for their passengers in a collision. Some *autos* are less safe for the passengers of the other autos in a collision. If I choose to drive a car that's safer for my passengers and a lesser hazard to others on the road in the event of an collision (even historically safe drivers can have accidents), then I don't want my choice of automobile to be ignored. If it's ignored and I am insured merely on my driving, then I have to be assessed the risks of those that would choose to drive an SUV that could mash other cars unscathed, or perhaps roll over. I'd have to pay premiums based on the assumption that I might be driving a T-Top that could get crushed into recycled-can form on impact.
The ratings on the driver that use credit reports are for the liability portion of the insurance,The rating on the comprehensive/collision part are rated by the type of vehicle.
Not strictly true. I simultaneously had two cars on which I only carried liability. The base rate (before my multi-car discount) for liability was higher on one car than the other. I assigned the same amount of driving activity to both vehicles and had not had an accident in either vehicle (at first).
I believe that on a multicar policy one car is always considered "primary" even though both are used equally.
Sorry -correction- if you are includng the mandatory personal liability in no-fault States-the part that pays for you or a family member's injuries or death, then yes-the kind of vehicle -air bags- antilock brakes etc. is part of the rating.
In line with the previous post's practical advice-- 1-Do away with all motor vehicles. (a) This will solve the stanglehold OPAC has on us. (b) This will save the arctic wild life from oil exploration. (c) This will allow my extremely retro spouse to open a profitable company manufacturing buggy whips.
