Split: CLUE Report

[tempest766]

So what do you guys do about things like the CLUE report? That's where (should be illegal but isn't) insurers share information about their own customer's claims (even no fault stuff like comprehensive) to make you less attractive to the competitors until your main carrier has recouped their loss by making you stick around for a few more years. I also have the misfortune of living in a state where it is perfectly acceptable for insurers to demand my social and run a credit check...which is problematic for me since I live a cash lifestyle and haven't borrowed money for nearly 15 years, and I don't give my social to ANY companies: just employer, bank, and uncle sam.

I'm curious to see kind of a rape I'm going to recieve from Nationwide when adding an FJR to my current Buell Uly that I'm paying $650/yr for (over 50, own my house, clean record for over 20 years).

Also surious what kind of prefernce you give to carriers who you can deal with face-to-face through a real agent, instead of online or telephone only BS.

 

[Bill Lumberg]

No benefit to dealing with a local agent unless you just want the socialization. My insurer knows my phone number. If I have an issue, I can dial the 800 number and it still routes me to the rep handling my case. I wouldn't use nationwide if they were half the price. But that's just because I've had dealings with them not covering things they were contractually obligated to cover.

 

[Bounce]

It's different for other locations by Dairyland has always been significantly lower priced than any other bike carrier for us.

 

[biknflyfisher]

Tempest:

Just curious why you think it should be illegal to use the CLUE system to verify past claims history. If you had 3 claims with Company A, and decide to move to company B, shouldn't they have a way of verifying that fact?

I agree that using your credit report as an underwriting tool (to define a good risk from a bad risk) is debatable.

Biknflyfisher

 

[BkerChuck]

PA born and raised, lived here my entire life, 54 years as of this point and I've never heard of this before. I've never been asked for my SS number on an insurance form in my life. My experience has always been that if you maintain a clean driving record you can shop around every few years and often get a better rate. I had Nationwide for several years and the rates kept climbing. Switched to Foremost insurance for a few years and even had to file a claim with them for a minor single vehicle accident in which I was at fault. Rates went up which I fully expected. Paid them for a few years and once claim was past 5 years shopped around again. Went to State Farm and gradually saw their rates climb. Now with Progressive and so far so good.

 

[tempest766]

PA born and raised, lived here my entire life, 54 years as of this point and I've never heard of this before. I've never been asked for my SS number on an insurance form in my life. My experience has always been that if you maintain a clean driving record you can shop around every few years and often get a better rate. I had Nationwide for several years and the rates kept climbing. Switched to Foremost insurance for a few years and even had to file a claim with them for a minor single vehicle accident in which I was at fault. Rates went up which I fully expected. Paid them for a few years and once claim was past 5 years shopped around again. Went to State Farm and gradually saw their rates climb. Now with Progressive and so far so good.

I'ts pretty common practice now for the insurer to ask for/use the SSN when giving a quote in states where they are allowed to do so. Wasn't the case when I moved to Colorado back in the 90s, but when I came back to PA, I was shocked when they demanded it to renew my policy and I checked with another carrier and they also required it. Maybe your SSN is already out in the ether and they got it by other means. I've always been alutra-paranoid about releasing mine so they had no point of reference to start with.

 

[tempest766]

Tempest: Just curious why you think it should be illegal to use the CLUE system to verify past claims history. If you had 3 claims with Company A, and decide to move to company B, shouldn't they have a way of verifying that fact? I agree that using your credit report as an underwriting tool (to define a good risk from a bad risk) is debatable. Biknflyfisher

claims information that does not result in an action against ones driving record should be confidential between the carrier and the customer. Hitting a deer or any other "comprehensive" claim does not reflect on ones driving record and should not give an insurance carrier leverage over a customer. Sharing no-fault claims information gives the insurers leverage against a customer shopping for the best price. As long as insurance is "required" by the state then this policy will be abhorant to me.

 

[biknflyfisher]

So Tempest, you are saying that if YOU owned an insurance company and I came to YOU for coverage with 3 "no fault" claims (a deer strike, a theft loss due to parking in a known bad place, and windstorm sandblasting out in the desert) totaling $25,000 in damages, you would give me the same rate as your best riding buddy with no tickets and no claims? I could just lie to you and say I had no claims to get the best rate possible.

CLUE makes this scenario impossible.

Nobody is saying you can't shop around, that is your right as a consumer in PA or anywhere else. But, your track record does indeed show up on that report.

Just my two cents......

 

[tempest766]

Of course it shows up and gives the insurance carrier unfair leverage over the consumer, since they can effectively force you to stay a customer for some number of years after any claim. It's not dissimilar to industry price setting, which is illegal, but hard to regulate and enforce. So on the one hand we have a state sponsored racket called mandatory insurance (and in all the states I''ve lived in the insurance carriers pretty much own the state insurance commisions), and on the other hand we as consumers can find ourselves victims of this price setting racket through no fault of our own.

BTW: I would never own an insurance company. I like to think I'm a bit too ethical to get involved in that "business". and yes, you should be required to give me the same rate based on my driving record, and nothing else. I'm guessing you'd support mandatory DNA testing as legitimate to underwriting medical insruance next, right? What's the point of having broad statistical classes to distribute risk if insurance firms can nickle and dime those classes into an almost infinite number of categories and charge differing rates almost on an individual basis?

First it was driving record and age experience based, then came the social categories single/married/lifestyle/home neighborhood, then came the credit check, next will come genetic predisposition toward degenerative diseases? When does it end, when a carrier can charge whatever they want to whomever they want and the public has no recourse? If it's just a business then whatever, but as long as it's required by the state as a consequence of driving then this shit needs to end!

And really, even though I deviated much from the orginal argument, what it boils down to is statistical risk. My "comprehensive" claims history has zero statistical bearing on underwriting risk. Insurance companies telling me otherwise is horseshit and them simply trying to justify consumer gouging.

Anyway, I digres because we will agree to disagree.