disturbing ICBC statement RE rhd

[Adrock]

no need to be sorry, just a heads up, the best thing is, when you're in a delica, it doesnt seem to matter how fast you're going.

[jrman]

First post...picked up my Deli last week. Haven't had this much fun since wrenching on my Cooper S over 20 years ago! Absolutely love this forum so tks to all of you!

Re ICBC - have close friend at ICBC who I chatted with re this news article. He was surprised that a supposed official report had already been released to the media. He tells me that only 2 weeks ago, all adjustors and estimators were emailed to ensure all RHD claims were noted to be RHD on various forms. He too suspects that there is a hidden agenda and agree with others in this post regarding "predetermined conclusions" and now ICBC is building a case to support it. The rumours circulating at ICBC is that even "a large auto dealer" (tks Rockcrete) is involved since his various car companies do not have a piece of the action on IVOAC vehicles.

On the other hand, the volume of RHD vehicles arriving on our soil does require that ICBC analyze the accident rate for these vehicles to ensure each vehicle is classed accordingly. That is their standard operating procedure, rightly or wrongly.

In the end, my spidey sense tells me something smells bad at ICBC vis-a-vis RHD vehicles and their intentions.

[josh]

Here is my question. Doesn't ICBC track all claims in order to determine insurance anyhow? I mean they know which vehicles are stolen the most... I am sure they know which ones are involved in the most accidents. So shouldn't all of this information then tell them which vehicles to insure higher? And if it does then why would RHD vs LHD matter? I mean they would already know that x percent of each particular make of vehicle involved in an accident and reflect that in the insurance... they would do this the same for Skylines, Delicas or the ever popular Ford's and GM's. Why oh why is this an RHD/LHD issue?

Josh

[rockcrete]

This study is meant to be handed to Transport Canada as evidence to scrap the 15 year rule as we at IVOAC tore apart TC's first study that was meant to prove this months ago. This study was deliberately made much more technical and confusing, but even the most basic mathematical calculations in it using their already flawed data have the wrong answers published. This study is a complete joke, I am very dissapointed that CKNW did not allow me to question one of the authors of this study when they had both of us on the air together, but even still he held the study at arms length and basiclly admitted that it means nothing and it will take them at least a couple of years to gather sufficient real data to have a meaningful study.

Something much larger is at work here, as the mandate all along has been to say RHD is dangerous and ban it ASAP despite what any existing data says or not. This reeks of corruption and outside influences at work within ICBC.

[mmilotay]

Here is the response I received from ICBC when I asked what the impetus was for the study:
Doug Henderson is on vacation, and he would know for sure, but my
understanding is that the impetus for the study came from two sources.
The media have been asking about the cars - as they are becoming more and more common. Second, we're aware that Transport Canada will soon be considering its rules for the importation of vehicles that don't meet Canadian safety standards and because of our position (because the vehicles are popular in BC and because ICBC is the sole provider of mandatory insurance in BC) we felt we would be able to put some facts on the table before Transport Canada begins its consultation. There was a similar study in the UK (only in their case it was about left-hand vehicles in a right-hand drive world) with similar conclusions and there was a desire to see if the same results were appearing here.

Doug