ICBC Enhances Efforts Against Insurance Fraud
North Vancouver, B.C. – ICBC is going high tech in its battle against insurance fraud.
Today the public insurer announced a new analytic tool it says will allow it to step up its fight against fraudulent claims.
Chris Fairbridge, manager of ICBC’s Special Investigation Unit, said in a news conference this morning the tool will allow ICBC to link claims data faster.
(Video below describes how ICBC’s new analytic tool works)
“The tool will help us to sift through larger amounts of data and free up our investigators to do their work. It looks at hidden links and points us to an alert where fraud may exist in a claim.”
He said the new tool has already resulted in 3,330 alerts resulting in 48 new investigations.
“This shines a light on another initiative to help us constrain rising insurance costs,” added B.C. Transportation and Infrastructure Minister Todd Stone. “The rising cost of living is on everyone’s minds and the rising costs of insurance rates is a concern.”
He said the new tool is one of several initiatives the government has recently taken to stem rising insurance rates.
Stone said other programs include the government’s crack down on distracted driving and an initiative announced last month that will see insurance rates double for high end luxury cars (see previous story here).
He estimated the new analytic tool would reduce costs by $21 million over the next year and $44 million by 2019.
ICBC also said while most claims are honest, insurance industry studies still show that exaggerated claims still make up for 10 to 20 per cent of all claims costs.
Comments
In my opinion, ICBC considers any and all personal injury claims to be exaggerated claims. They will take each and every opportunity to drag out the claims process and drive up the accompanying costs to the injured party in the hopes that the injured party will accept their pathetic settlement offer.
Does ICBC still pay bonuses to adjusters who close files quickly?
I believe the answer to your question is “yes”
I still don’t get how they think they can penalize the driver of an exotic car if they are the ones that are not at fault of an accident? If someone hits my vehicle? Their insurance should be on the hook for the damage no matter the cost.
As for ICBC worrying about exaggerated claims. They are a little late on that boat. That will not stop happening until the claims adjusters offer a fair amount right off the bat rather than lowball an embarrassing offer.
My understanding is exotic cars cost quite a bit more to repair than an average vehicle. If an exotic car costs more to repair, the owner should pay a premium for their insurance – not the rest of us.
They do pay more for their insurance. ICBC just doesn’t want to pay the cost to repair one of those cars if it is being paid by a customers insurance who owns a Honda Civic. But if you hit my car, your insurance should pay for the damage. And if it costs 30k for a bumper? So be it. What’s the point in buying insurance with a 3 million dollar liability? ICBC should be able to use that to cover the repair costs also.
Both my vehicles have 15 million liability and neither is worth over 30k (now – more than that when new of course)
Seriously injure a family in a mini van and see where 3 million will take you. As I understand it your liability covers the other vehicle and its passengers and the passengers in yours if you are found to be at fault (hence the word liability – you are liable for or they are your liability) – not yourself or your vehicle with ICBC, those are covered under a different component of the insurance like basic or comprehensive. Please correct me if I am wrong, I just find I sleep slightly better at night paying the extra few bucks a year if I should mess up and cause an accident and end up losing everything in a lawsuit with ICBC over 60 bucks a year
My motorcycle basic liability coverage costs more than a car. I’m not talking about collision or comprehensive, it’s that $200,000 liability everyone has to carry, and can only be bought from ICBC.
It’s a fact that motorcycles hitting almost anything generally cause less damage than a car would, so why would our basic liability coverage be higher when it’s impossible for us to do significant damage to most vehicles or the people in them. So I asked.
ICBC came to the conclusion that motorcycle riders experience greater than average claims when it comes to being injured – when the other car is at fault. So even though someone else is hitting them, ICBC decided to increase the cost of basic insurance for motorcycles, to cover the increased risk of injury inherent riding a motorcycle. Basically they’re saying, if you’re crazy enough to ride a motorcycle, you should kick more into the pot to pay for claims when motorcyclists are injured. Motorcyclists, when you look only at pay out claims when they are at fault, pay significantly more into the pot than is paid out in claims.
So, now ICBC has turned this logic to luxury cars. The average insured vehicle out there is worth about $30,000. You’ve chosen to drive a vehicle worth $250,000, so if you get hit – not your fault, the claims cost is 8 times the average, so they want you to kick more into the pot to cover the excess cost from your choice of a luxury vehicle.
Just another tool to use to deny claims and another way to justify higher rates for everyone..
The first thing they should do with this new tool that they are talking about is use it on themselves ICBC and save us all a pocket full of money.
Further to what oldman1 said;
They should develop a tool that will fairly compensate the top executives at icbc. You know I mean that top executive pay is far too generous, for a supposedly taxpayer owned institution.
But back here in the real world, I’m glad that the insurance corp might be able to crack down and lessen car insurance fraud, maybe there is a chance that insurance rates will not go up quite as much in the future, as a result.
metalman.
ICBC needs more money for Christy to give to her rich friend’s. Its a gold mine.
Cheers
ICBC will continue to treat ALL people involved on ANY claim as suspicious and thus force the victims to seek legal help in setting their claims and rates will continue to escalate.
Actually, in some cases, ICBC doesn’t do even the most elementary due diligence. At least in the case of minor accidents with no injuries, if you accept responsibility for the accident, they do not provide you with any information about the precise extent of the damage or the details of the repair costs. As a result, nothing prevents the owner of the damaged vehicle from claiming for damage that you did not cause so long as it is consistent with the description of the accident. You would think that they would at least provide you with the other party’s claim.
That is unfortunately true, billposer.
I have experienced that same scenario exactly.
Quite a few years ago the lady driving a sedan in front of my pickup stopped suddenly partway through the S curves downtown where 2nd becomes 3rd.
It was late fall, so cold, but dry pavement. I saw it happening, thought that I had plenty of time to slow quickly and not hit her car, alas anti lock braking took over, my pick up’s bumper struck her trunk lid, lightly.
We pulled over up ahead to exchange info, no harsh words in either court. My truck had the mud on the front of the bumper disturbed, what I mean is there was a mark on the dirt on the face of the bumper, stock ’99 Dodge Ram tinfoil bumper, but really, no damage to my truck.
In examining her car, I had to look closely (at the lady’s direction) to see that the trunk lid was slightly misshapen, it was a late 70’s or early 80’s GM 4 door sedan, fairly sturdy. The protruding tail lights were not damaged, though they would have been in the impact zone.
Point is, I was in the wrong, and accepted that from the beginning, and expected a call from ICBC the next week.
That call never came.
After a couple of months I figured the lady must have decided not to bother making a claim, good deal.
A few months after the accident, I received a letter from ICBC stating that a claim had been processed against my truck insurance, for the afore described incident. The letter indicated that there was a fairly high value of collision repair done to the lady’s car.
I phoned ICBC, got to talk to some guy who looked it up for me, told me that there was significant damage to repair, and the entire car had to be resprayed.
I protested of course, tried to tell my side and my impressions of the damage, but to no avail. The claim had been processed, and completed, their last act was to send me a letter.
Lesson learned? Maybe one should take pictures in such a situation, and follow up with ICBC proactively, to protect one’s claim history.
metalman.
I just insured a business vehicle (a car) and I insured it for the very least basic coverage as I carry private insurance for everything else.
$800.00 per year, for bare bones basic coverage!
If ICBC wants to talk about crime, I would suggest that $800.00 per year for basic barebones coverage is highway robbery! How’s that for crime?
Can you justify that on the basis of rates in, for example, other provinces?
I would vote for Donald Trump or Kim Jong Un for Premier if either promised to get rid of ICBC. If I want to buy private insurance and the private insurance company wants to sell to me then how is it I don’t have that option?
I remember (Back in the day) when we had private insurance. Seems to me that it was not that great.
In fact I remember one instance when they cancelled an individuals insurance, and when he questioned them about it, they stated that statistically every driver has an accident within a seven year period. This individual had gone seven years without an accident, so they felt that he was overdue, and therefore chose not to insure him.
There are other instances also. I suggest that we put pressure on ICBC to clean up their act, however going back to private insurance may not be a good idea.
Yeah your right Palopu…I remember those days as well, but at least there were a thousand other sources to get insurance from. We are being held at gunpoint by these thugs who we trust to give us the straight goods on profit and loss. Personally, I don’t trust any politician to manage anything much less tell the truth.
Well one think we don’t need is only private insurance. Private insurance companies all stick together and keep their rates the same like fuel service stations before Costco came to town. What we need to do is get rid of the BC Liberals and have another party look at ICBC to see why rates keep going up.
Hey why not? ICBC could undercover even more fraud within their own organization!
“Eight workers were involved in the scheme at an ICBC research centre in Burnaby where repaired cars were sold to unsuspecting buyers or bought by ICBC staff through auctions that may have been rigged. Three ICBC top-level executives have left since the scandal broke and the RCMP is investigating the car-sale scheme.”
ht tp://bc.ctvnews.ca/employees-in-icbc-car-scam-to-get-825-000-1.348563
Comments for this article are closed.