A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

Laval, 2019

This document is protected by copyright law. Use of the services of Érudit

(including reproduction) is subject to its terms and conditions, which can be

viewed online.

https://apropos.erudit.org/en/users/policy-on-use/

This article is disseminated and preserved by Érudit.

Érudit is a non-profit inter-university consortium of the Université de Montréal,

Université Laval, and the Université du Québec à Montréal. Its mission is to

promote and disseminate research.

https://www.erudit.org/en/

Document generated on 09/05/2024 7:08 p.m.

Assurances et gestion des risques

Insurance and Risk Management

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

Rose Anne Devlin

Volume 86, Number 1-2, June 2019

URI: https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/1062464ar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/1062464ar

See table of contents

Publisher(s)

Faculté des sciences de l'administration, Université Laval

ISSN

1705-7299 (print)

2371-4913 (digital)

Explore this journal

Cite this document

Devlin, R. A. (2019). A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada.

Assurances et gestion des risques / Insurance and Risk Management, 86(1-2),

55–96. https://doi.org/10.7202/1062464ar

Article abstract

This article compares and contrasts automobile insurance provisions across

Canadian jurisdictions, with particular emphasis on comparing how British

Columbia (BC) fares relative to other provinces. A brief discussion of the

different automobile insurance regimes is provided, as well as the mandated

packages in each province. Price quotes are obtained by jurisdiction for the

mandated package as well as for enhanced packages, for a hypothetical driver

(either male of female) with a driving record that is good or poor, who is 45

years of age and drives a Honda Civic. We find that prices in Vancouver, BC are

in the middle of the pack, and are much lower than in Toronto, Ontario for a

driver with a good record. BC average prices are similar to those in

Saskatchewan and Manitoba. Loss ratios vary quite a bit over the period

2011-2015, with no clear pattern except that they are always higher in public

regimes than private ones. Because these ratios fluctuate from year to year, no

one single province has performed consistently or significantly better than the

others. One must be very careful when drawing hard and fast conclusions

because of the differences in insurance packages across provinces and the

aggregated and limited nature of much of the available data. Four conclusions

are notable: (i) Automobile prices charged in BC are in line with those of

Manitoba, (ii) a driver in Vancouver pays significantly less than an otherwise

comparable driver in Toronto, (iii) in the private system, Ontario has the

lowest loss ratios while, in the public system, there is no discernable, stable,

relationship across the jurisdictions, and (iv) average claim costs cannot be

compared across regimes.

ARTICLES PROFESSIONNELS

PROFESSIONAL ARTICLES

Assurances et gestion des risques, Vol. 86 (1-2)

Insurance and risk management, Vol. 86 (1-2)

A COMPARISON OF AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

REGIMES IN CANADA

Rose Anne DEVLIN

, University of Ottawa

ABSTRACT

This article compares and contrasts automobile insurance provisions across

Canadian jurisdictions, with particular emphasis on comparing how British

Columbia (BC) fares relative to other provinces. A brief discussion of the differ-

ent automobile insurance regimes is provided, as well as the mandated packages

in each province. Price quotes are obtained by jurisdiction for the mandated

package as well as for enhanced packages, for a hypothetical driver (either male

of female) with a driving record that is good or poor, who is 45 years of age and

drives a Honda Civic. We ﬁnd that prices in Vancouver, BC are in the middle of

the pack, and are much lower than in Toronto, Ontario for a driver with a good

record. BC average prices are similar to those in Saskatchewan and Manitoba.

Loss ratios vary quite a bit over the period 2011-2015, with no clear pattern except

that they are always higher in public regimes than private ones. Because these

ratios ﬂuctuate from year to year, no one single province has performed consis-

tently or signiﬁcantly better than the others. One must be very careful when

drawing hard and fast conclusions because of the differences in insurance pack-

ages across provinces and the aggregated and limited nature of much of the

available data. Four conclusions are notable: (i) Automobile prices charged in

BC are in line with those of Manitoba, (ii) a driver in Vancouver pays signiﬁcantly

less than an otherwise comparable driver in Toronto, (iii) in the private system,

Ontario has the lowest loss ratios while, in the public system, there is no dis-

cernable, stable, relationship across the jurisdictions, and (iv) average claim costs

cannot be compared across regimes.

56 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

IntroductIon

This article compares and contrasts automobile insurance provisions

across Canadian jurisdictions, with a particular emphasis on British

Columbia (BC). A brief discussion of the different automobile insurance

regimes in Canada is provided, as well as the mandated packages in

each province.

Good data are very difﬁcult to obtain in any one jurisdiction let alone

across all of the provinces in Canada. Several compromises had to be

made. For instance, the Quebec data were simply not comparable to

the other jurisdictions on several fronts, and hence had to be elimi-

nated. Data from the General Insurance Statistical Agency (GISA) has

been used for the six provinces with private automobile insurance

regimes and these data were only available from 2011 to 2015. These

data are reasonably comparable across these provinces but obtaining

comparable data from the public provinces was complicated. In this

respect, caution has to be taken throughout this report.

Insurance prices were obtained largely through a price-quote agency,

as well as through direct contact with various ﬁrms. There was no

attempt to put any particular regime in a better light than others. After

much thought and several preliminary investigations, it was decided

to let the representative driver be a reasonably average one—45 years

of age, driving a Honda Civic, employed, yielding price quotes that are

indicative of what one would be facing in the different provinces.

This article is structured as follows. It starts with a review of the

compulsory insurance packages mandated in each regime. While the

list of beneﬁts accompanying these packages is very similar, quite a

bit of variation is seen in the details of these beneﬁts across provinces.

This review groups provinces as liability or no-fault regimes, and as

private and public provision. The next section provides data on the

price of automobile insurance by province (except Quebec). Quotes

were obtained from a variety of companies, especially in the private

regimes. Huge variations were found in prices. When comparing some-

one living in Toronto to the same person in Vancouver, a good driving

record resulted in a much lower price in BC than in Ontario. The third

section compares costs across public and private regimes. Intra-regime

comparisons are much more reliable than inter-regime ones. That being

said, private regimes had lower loss ratios in general when compared

to public ones. The BC regime is reasonably comparable to the other

two public systems in this regard. It is not possible to compare average

claim costs across public and private regimes because, among other

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

reasons, of the way in which claims are counted. A fourth section

examines some of the factors inﬂuencing demand for insurance, espe-

cially the number of registered vehicles per capita on the road. Alberta

and Saskatchewan stand out as having the highest and second highest

number, respectively. BC is in the middle of the pack.

There is a slight upward trend across the board in this number. Fatal

accidents per registered vehicle, displays an overall downward trend.

Finally, a few words are added about the public versus private provi-

sion debate. Overall, there is remarkably little empirical work done on

this issue, with one serious undertaking for Canada done in 1976. Not

surprisingly, there is no clear cut answer as to which regime is better:

the public regime is likely to reap economies of scale and hence have

lower costs, but the private one is likely to provide a larger range of

products. A few overall conclusions are discussed in the last section.

1. a BrIeF revIew oF automoBIle Insurance

IncanadIan provInces

A minimum level of automobile insurance coverage is mandated and

compulsory in every jurisdiction in Canada. Automobile insurance

regimes can be described as being based primarily upon liability-based

or no-fault-based rules, and can be described as being publicly or pri-

vately provided. Six provinces have purely private provision (subject

always to public regulations), and four have public monopoly provision

(they are really ‘hybrid’ systems insofar as private companies can pro-

vide insurance beyond the basic mandated package; Quebec is an

outlier insofar as it has publicly provided insurance for bodily injuries,

and privately provided insurance for property damages).

Each province mandates the minimum requirements for an automo-

bile insurance policy. These are described in the Appendix tables A1:

table A1a details the requirements in the private provinces and

tableA1b details the same for the public provinces. While the list of

beneﬁts provided in all jurisdictions is more or less the same, there are

differences across the regimes in terms of amounts and details. Tables

A1a and b reveal, for instance, differences in the amount of medical

care provided in the event of an accident, death and survivor beneﬁts,

and income replacement rules, across the jurisdictions. It is important

to look at the signiﬁcant differences across provinces in terms of the

minimum or basic insurance package, because these will affect the

minimum price of insurance.

58 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

a) Liability-Based Vs No-Fault-Based Automobile

InsuranceRegimes

Under a liability regime, damages incurred by not-at-fault victims of

accidents are recovered from at-fault drivers; drivers thus take out

third-party liability insurance to cover these costs in the event of an

at-fault accident. Tables A1a and A1b reveal that all provincial jurisdic-

tions in Canada mandate third-party coverage. If an insurance package

were comprised only of third-party liability provisions, then those who

suffered losses as a result of the fault of others, would be entitled to

compensation by the at fault drivers, but the at-fault drivers would not

receive any indemniﬁcation for own injuries or damages. But this does

not describe the situation in Canadian provinces. All automobile insur-

ance regimes in Canada except for Newfoundland and Labrador where

it is optional, require some ﬁrst-party coverage that compensates for

‘own’ (ﬁrst party) losses irrespective of fault. Some commentators

describe regimes with such ﬁrst party coverage as ‘no fault’ ones, but

normally to be classiﬁed as a ‘no- fault’ regime, there are restrictions

on the right to sue the at-fault driver for damages incurred.

All private insurance regimes have restrictions on the amount of

money that can be awarded by the courts for pain and suffering, as

indicated in table A1a. Those provinces that have maximum awards for

pain and suffering for minor injuries, namely Alberta, New Brunswick,

Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador,

are not usually considered as no-fault jurisdictions. Ontario, which

limits the right to sue for pain and suffering to injuries that are deemed

to be ‘severe’, is considered to be a ‘partial’ no-fault regime.

Of the four public insurance provinces, three have no-fault regimes.

Manitoba and Quebec do not allow any suits for pain and suffering,

and Saskatchewan imposes a $5,000 deductible on awards for pain and

suffering (since 2003, Saskatchewan has allowed drivers to opt out of

no-fault provisions, but this is rarely done). Manitoba and Saskatchewan

would be considered as ‘partial’ no-fault regimes as the right to sue for

economic losses in excess of no- fault beneﬁts is maintained. By con-

trast, Quebec has a pure no-fault system for all road accidents involving

bodily injuries. This means that Quebecers cannot resort to the tort

system to sue for additional damage recovery.

The point of this brief overview is to highlight the main similarities

and differences across provincial jurisdictions with the view to identi-

fying where problems may arise when comparing provincial automo-

bile insurance plans, especially with respect to prices and ﬁnancial

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

outcomes. One expects big differences to exist across public and pri-

vate regimes, and liability and no-fault ones. I will expand upon some

of the intricacies of these differences as needed below. I now turn to

a discussion of the price of automobile insurance in each jurisdiction.

In order to compare across provincial jurisdictions, quotes were

obtained for several different driver proﬁles. The following section

presents this information.

2. the prIce oF auto Insurance across provInces

Insurance prices depend upon a variety of factors which may differ

across provincial jurisdictions. Table A2 in the Appendix lists these

factors, including: type of vehicle; place of residence; driving record;

use of vehicle; sex; age; and marital status. These latter three ‘personal’

criteria are regularly criticized as being ‘discriminatory’. Whereas sta-

tistically, young, single, males have more accidents, the argument is

often raised that individuals should not be judged ex ante based on

statistical averages. The public provinces do not price based on age

orsex.

As indicated in table A2, many factors are taken into account when

pricing insurance. For the purposes of this report, estimates were

obtained for the price of insurance for a man and for a woman with

the following characteristics: 45 years old, single, employed, driving to

work 15 kilometers, annual driving of 15,000 kilometers, 2008 Honda

Civic (4 door, DX model), living in a city (the most populous city in

the province, as speciﬁed in the table). This price was obtained

for someone with a ‘clean’ driving record (no at fault accidents in

past 10 years, see the footnote that follows this sentence) and a ‘poor’

record deﬁned as one partially at-fault accident and one speeding ticket

over the past three years.

For the private insurance regimes, the

Kanetix web site provides a host of prices for the identiﬁed driver from

several companies (but the company with the ‘lowest’ price in Ontario

is not identiﬁed, one has to contact Kanetix directly for this informa-

tion).

In addition, price quotes were obtained from several other large

insurance companies either by telephone or on line. All prices were

obtained in May-June 2017.

All price quotes were obtained for the ‘mandated’ coverage (as

required by law, and deﬁned in tables A1a and A1b) and for a ‘ complete’

package with higher-than-mandated liability limits, comprehensive

60 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

coverage, as well as other beneﬁts (deﬁned in Appendix table A3). One

important caveat is that in the private regimes, insurance companies

typically do not offer packages with just the minimum prescribed third

party insurance amounts, as these are inadequate to cover damages in

the event of an accident. Normally, insurance companies require that

one takes out at least one million dollars in such coverage (whereas

the mandated amount is $200,000 in most jurisdictions). In the public

regime, the minimum mandated amount is provided. Table A3 also

provides the minimum amounts of liability coverage available

byjurisdiction.

For the public regimes, the prices were obtained in Manitoba from

the Autopac web site; in Saskatchewan, basic coverage was obtained

from the SGI web site and the complete package was obtained by

telephone from the broker companies located around the postal code

of the representative driver, recommended on the SGI website

. All of

the information for British Columbia was also obtained by calling the

brokers recommended on the ICBC website around the postal code of

the driver.

All of the data gathered on prices are provided in the Appendix,

tables A4a-d. Tables A4a-d present all of the price quotes received by

jurisdiction and important notes to take into account. Table A4a con-

tains prices for the private provinces for our representative driver with

a good driving record; table A4b contains the same for a poor driving

record (except for Newfoundland and Labrador which did not provide

quotes for poor drivers). Tables A4c and d present the same informa-

tion but this time for the public provinces. Before turning to a discus-

sion of pricing tendencies from tables A4a-d, it is interesting to note

that for the 45-year-old driver featured here, the insurance price for

women is often higher than that for men. It is for young drivers that

the opposite occurs: young men are typically charged higher prices

than young women in private regimes. For instance, a 21 years old

female student living at home but principal driver of the aforemen-

tioned 2008 Honda Civic, is charged at least $3,459 for the mandated

coverage, whereas an otherwise similar male would be charged $3,997.

In order to focus the discussion, the key data from tables A4a-d are

synthesized and presented in table 1. Table 1 reports three prices (with

a fourth for Ontario) each for males and for females, for mandated

coverage and for complete (optional) coverage, and for a clean driving

record and for a poor driving record (as previously deﬁned). The three

prices are as follows: the ﬁrst number is the minimum price quoted

byan identiﬁed insurance company; the next number below is the

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

TABLE 1 Price Quotes for 45 year old, Employed Driver (Honda Civic)

Source: Appendix Tables A4a-d

CLEAN RECORD POOR RECORD

Required

Coverage

Complete

Coverage

Required

Coverage

Complete

Coverage

Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male

Ontario (Toronto) 1,671 1,661 1,815 1,930 2,538 2,493 3,149 3,255

Maximum 3,948 3,948 4,724 4,463 6,572 6,572 7,809 7,809

Unspeciﬁed Minimum N/A 1,285 N/A 1,727 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Average 2,464 2,497 2,815 2,848 4,394 4,354 5,295 5,259

Alberta (Calgary) 669 667 1,223 1,223 1,216 1,216 2,481 2,481

Maximum 978 902 1,897 1,954 1,236 1,236 2,862 2,991

Average 796 782 1,466 1,473 1,223 1,223 2,663 2,669

Nova Scotia (Halifax) 653 643 1,032 1,032 856 845 1,464 1,479

Maximum 924 924 1,433 1,190 1,374 1,374 2,153 2,153

Average 764 760 1,170 1,176 1,115 1,110 1,809 1,816

PEI (Charlottetown) 391 391 1,002 1,002 554 554 1,545 1,604

Maximum 629 629 1,213 1,213 887 887 1,967 1,967

Average 517 516 1,074 1,085 721 721 1,756 1,756

NB (Moncton) 587 587 1,049 1,049 933 933 1,432 1,432

Maximum 898 898 1,349 1,349 2,035 2,035 2,776 2,776

Average 775 775 1,180 1,180 1,484 1,481 2,102 2,104

NL (St Johns) 918 918 1,329 1,329

Maximum 1,751 1,751 2,377 2,377 

Average 1,258 1,258 1,832 1,832    

BC (Vancouver) 1,064 1,064 1,618 1,618 1,514 1,514 1,743 1,743

Maximum 1,123 1,123 2,372 2,372 1,618 1,618 2,640 2,640

Average 1,087 1,087 1,853 1,853 1,571 1,571 2,310 2,310

Manitoba (Winnipeg) 1,167 1,167 1,451 1,451 1,239 1,239 1,541 1,541

Maximum 1,167 1,167 1,451 1,451 1,239 1,239 1,541 1,541

Average 1,167 1,167 1,451 1,451 1,239 1,239 1,541 1,541

Saskatchewan (Saskatoon) 917 917 1,125 1,125 978 978 1,186 1,186

Maximum 917 917 1,142 1,142 978 978 1,196 1,196

Average 917 917 1,131 1,131 978 978 1,192 1,192

Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

maximum price quoted by an identiﬁed insurance company; under-

neath the maximum price in Ontario only is the ‘lowest unspeciﬁed

price’ from Kanetix;

lastly, I report the average of all of the quotes

obtained. All of this information is given for all provinces except

Quebec: the private regimes are presented first followed by the

publicones.

a) Private Insurance Regime Prices

Several observations can be made from Table 1 with respect to the

private provinces. First, it reveals the importance of driving record—for

mandatory coverage, a poor record for a driver in Toronto, Ontario,

results in an increase in the lowest rates from $1,406 to $2,538 for a

woman, and from $1,661 to $2,493 for a man. In Calgary, Alberta, the

comparable minimum coverage rates go from $669 to $1,216 for

females and from $667 to $1,216 for males. Table 1 also reveals the

importance of coverage—moving from the mandated coverage to a

more complete coverage results in a signiﬁcant increase in rates. For

the 45-year-old male living in Toronto, his best price goes from $1,661

(mandatory package) to $1,930 (complete package). The prices in

theMaritime Provinces are different than in Ontario, but display a

similarpattern.

Whereas the previous paragraph focused on the lowest price quoted

for the private regimes, if one looks at the average of all of the quoted

prices (as reported in Tables A4a and b), it renders even clearer that

Ontario is by far the most expensive province for drivers, irrespec-

tiveof sex or driving record. It is actually quite startling the magnitude

of the rates quoted for Toronto relative to these other, albeit much

smaller,cities.

Finally, with respect to the private regimes, there is a huge difference

between the prices quoted for Ontario (Toronto) and for the other

provinces especially for the basic, mandated, coverage. These differ-

ences are smaller when one compares prices for the complete insur-

ance package, but it is clear that population size (actually, more likely

to be population density) plays a role in explaining prices.

b) Public Insurance Regime Prices

Information on prices from the three public jurisdictions (excluding

Quebec) is presented in the bottom part of table 1. These prices do

not vary by gender but do vary by driving record. All prices reported

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

for the public provinces exclude registration and licensing fees which

were initially reported in the insurance price: $161 were subtracted in

Manitoba, $68 in Saskatchewan and $61 in BC.

The price for someone with a clean driving record and mandatory

coverage in Winnipeg, Manitoba is $1,167 and for the extended,

‘ complete’ coverage, it is $1,451. In Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, basic

coverage costs $917 while the price of complete coverage varies a bit

according to brokers used, from $1,125 to $1,217. In Vancouver, British

Columbia, both basic coverage and the optional (complete) plan vary

by broker: from $1,064 to $1,123 (basic) and from $1,618 to $2,372

(complete).

Only in BC is there some variation in the prices quoted across the

coverages. But the variation is quite small when compared to what was

observed in the private jurisdictions. As a consequence, average prices

are only slightly different than the minimum price indicated for BC in

table 1.

Having a poor driving record also leads to an increase in the price

of insurance in the public provinces. Basic coverage goes up from

$1,167 to $1,239 in Manitoba, from $917 to $978 in Saskatchewan, and

the minimum quote in BC moves from $1,064 to $1,514. Even though

the population of Greater Vancouver, at 2.46 million, is the same

asthepopulation of the other two public provinces combined

(Saskatchewan with 1.15million and Manitoba with 1.32million) and

far exceeds the population in the other two cities, the amount charged

a driver inVancouver for required coverage is less than that of

Winnipeg ($1,064versus $1,167), and not far off of the lowest-priced

jurisdiction, Saskatoon ($917).

Once complete coverage is taken into

account, the Vancouver driver pays a bit more ($1,618 versus $1,451),

but still surprisingly close given the huge population differences in

these jurisdictions.

The average prices of the minimum required insurance package

across the three public auto insurance provinces are remarkably similar.

Saskatchewan charges the lowest price on average, Manitoba charges

the highest on average, and BC is in the middle. Once again, the fact

that Vancouver is signiﬁcantly larger and more densely populated than

either Saskatoon or Winnipeg would lead one to anticipate signiﬁcantly

higher prices in Vancouver, but this is not clearly revealed by the data.

Moreover, the fact that Saskatchewan and Manitoba run no-fault sys-

tems with restrictions on the right to sue for pain and suffering might

64 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

also lead to the expectation of clearly lower prices in these jurisdictions

relative to the liability-based province of British Columbia—but this is

not the case either.

c) Comparing BC Prices to other Public and Private

InsuranceRegimes

With much caution, one can compare across private and public regimes.

To facilitate this comparison, table 2 extracts the average prices from

table 1 for the minimum required insurance package for each prov-

ince for the 45-year-old employed female or male driver of a Honda

Civic, with a clean driving record. These average prices are reported

from highest to lowest.

TABLE 2

Average Price for Minimum Required Coverage: 45 year old,

Employed Driver (Honda Civic) Extracted from Table 1

PROVINCE FEMALE MALE

Ontario (Toronto) 2,464 2,497

Newfoundland (St. John’s) 1,258 1,258

Manitoba (Winnipeg) 1,167 1,167

British Columbia (Vancouver) 1,087 1,087

Saskatchewan (Saskatoon) 917 917

Alberta (Calgary) 796 782

New Brunswick (Moncton) 775 775

Nova Scotia (Halifax) 764 760

PEI (Charlottetown) 517 516

From table 2 it is clear that the average price in British Columbia

(Vancouver) is in the middle of the pack and most closely comparable

to the prices in Manitoba and Saskatchewan, the other two public

jurisdictions. The two largest cities in this sample are Vancouver and

Toronto: the Greater Toronto Area has a population of 6.42 million,

while Greater Vancouver has 2.46 million. However, a driver with a

good record in Vancouver pays signiﬁcantly less (in fact less than half

for the driver featured in table 2) than an otherwise comparable driver

in Toronto. This observation is particularly interesting because Toronto

is in a no-fault province that has already severely restricted the right

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

to sue for pain and suffering for all but severe injuries which was the-

oretically supposed to keep costs (and hence prices) down, whereas

Vancouver is in a liability-based regime.

Once again, it is important to remember that the insurance packages

are not entirely comparable across jurisdictions. The focus on manda-

tory packages, and minimum quotes, helps to determine the cost of

entry into driving by province—which is somewhat comparable across

jurisdictions. But from tables 1A and B, one can see that there are

differences across many of the beneﬁts provided in the mandatory

packages, affecting prices.

3. comparIng costs across puBlIc

andprIvateregImes

Before turning to comparisons of insurance costs, it is necessary to

understand a couple of fundamental differences between public and

private regimes when it comes to collecting and interpreting data. Since

2011, data for the private provinces are available from the General

Insurance Statistical Agency (GISA) “… an independent legal entity

under the Canada Corporations Act … to carry out the activities of a

statistical agent on behalf of all participating Canadian jurisdictions.”

The Insurance Bureau of Canada collects this data on behalf of GISA.

Efforts are made to render these data as accurate as possible, hence

facilitating interprovincial comparisons. No comparable information

prior to 2011 was available from IBC.

Some information is not included in the available GISA data, most

importantly from the point of view of this comparison, is the exemption

of Facility Association residual market information. High-risk drivers,

who cannot obtain automobile insurance through conventional means,

have to apply to a Facility Association, which provides them with cov-

erage typically by facilitating a risk-pooling contract across several

companies. Facility Associations exist in all privately provided automo-

bile insurance regimes because automobile insurance is mandatory.

Not only is the information from these high risk drivers exempt from

GISA data, but so too is information from uninsured drivers.

The

Facility Associations have an uninsured motorist fund that indemniﬁes

victims of uninsured drivers. Thus, GISA data does not include all of

the very high risk portion of the driving population.

66 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

By contrast, data from public insurance provinces are obtained from

the public insurer itself. These data include all drivers, even the high

risk ones. And each public insurer has a fund to deal with uninsured

drivers. In other words, the insurance data presented below include

all insured drivers in the public jurisdictions but not in the private

jurisdictions were data on the riskiest group is excluded.

In addition to these exclusions, there is potentially a fundamental

difference between the number of claims reported in a liability-based

private system versus a ﬁrst-party-based public one. In a liability

regime, a driver involved in an accident through no fault of his/her

own, will not typically make a claim on his/her own insurance policy.

The claim will be on the at-fault driver’s policy. As a result, such an

accident with two vehicles, say, will result in one claim. In the public,

ﬁrst-party, system, such an accident would yield two claims, one for

each vehicle. We cannot, then, compare number of claims across these

two systems, which is apparent in the next section.

a) Interprovincial Comparisons:

LossRatiosandAverageClaim Costs

Notwithstanding the difﬁculties associated with comparing insurance

regimes across provinces, a simple measure of the costs of insurance

provision is looked at: the “Claim and Adjustment Expenses Incurred”

divided by the “Earned Premiums”—known as the “Earned Incurred

Loss Ratio” (referred to as the “Loss Ratio”). The claim and adjustment

expenses refer to the amounts reported by insurance companies

directly associated with claims. Earned premiums are the premiums

paid for the policies during the ﬁscal year: if someone began their

policy half way through the year but paid for a full year in advance,

only one-half of these premiums would count in this number. Similarly,

if someone were to cancel their policy during the year, the amount

reimbursed would be netted out of this ﬁgure.

The focus on the loss ratio allows one to ﬁnd reasonably comparable

information for all jurisdictions (except Quebec). The loss ratio pro-

vides a measure of the amount of money paid out for claims relative

to the amount of premiums earned: the larger this number, the closer

premiums reﬂect claims. As this ratio approaches one, claim costs

approach premiums paid and arguably this implies that there is less

‘waste’ in the system. As a result, the loss ratio has been treated as a

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

measure of performance. But it is an imperfect one. This ratio can be

high for several reasons, including premiums being set ‘too low’; claims

being ‘too high’; or a combination of both of these factors.

That being said, the loss ratio is one way to compare jurisdictions.

Like before, it makes sense to continue to discuss the private and pub-

lic systems separately. The top half of table 3 presents the earned

premiums and claim expenses for the private systems: the four Atlantic

Provinces (together), Ontario and Alberta, for the ﬁve-year period: 2011

to 2015. As previously indicated, all of these data are gathered from

the same source, the General Insurance Statistical Agency, which helps

render them comparable. The second half of the table reports the

public regimes.

TABLE 3

Earned Premiums, Claim and Adjustment Expenses Incurred

and Earned Incurred Loss Ratio

PROVINCE

COVERAGE AND

ACCIDENT YEAR EARNED PREMIUMS

CLAIM AND

ADJUSTMENT

EXPENSES INCURRED

EARNED

INCURRED LOSS

RATIO (%)

Alberta 2011 2,476,498,770 1,737,461,860 70

2012 2,583,782,815 2,023,238,074 78

2013 2,738,168,536 2,156,806,256 79

2014 2,931,948,823 2,357,661,553 80

2015 3,093,938,231 2,491,948,366 81

Total 13,824,337,175 10,767,116,109 78

Atlantic Provinces 2011 1,163,948,471 777,985,471 67

2012 1,174,441,574 804,537,082 69

2013 1,184,283,171 865,660,975 73

2014 1,199,866,294 901,404,977 75

2015 1,218,228,911 981,135,267 81

Total 5,940,768,422 4,330,723,772 73

Ontario 2011 10,037,791,312 6,322,237,101 63

2012 10,439,481,575 6,274,427,278 60

2013 10,582,013,779 6,806,718,445 64

2014 10,538,886,511 7,103,631,213 67

2015 10,378,560,055 7,600,789,200 73

Total 51,976,733,233 34,107,803,237 66

→

68 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

PROVINCE

COVERAGE AND

ACCIDENT YEAR EARNED PREMIUMS

CLAIM AND

ADJUSTMENT

EXPENSES INCURRED

EARNED

INCURRED LOSS

RATIO (%)

British Columbia 2006 3,256,856,000 2,944,453,000 90

2007 3,482,434,000 2,914,550,000 84

2008 3,631,215,000 2,819,138,000 78

2009 3,650,025,000 2,970,125,000 81

2010 3,667,324,000 3,074,228,000 84

2011 3,673,210,000 3,186,563,000 87

2012 3,811,386,000 3,276,291,000 86

2013 3,927,694,000 3,434,660,000 87

2014 4,158,695,000 3,894,833,000 94

2015 4,447,931,000 4,363,495,000 98

Total 37,706,770,000 32,878,336,000 86

Saskatchewan* 2006 542,204,000 449,072,000 83

2007 557,087,000 532,217,000 96

2008 587,918,000 563,965,000 96

2009 630,559,000 600,432,000 95

2010 684,821,000 609,673,000 89

2011 726,282,000 806,924,000 111

2012 767,226,000 740,528,000 97

2013 806,965,000 739,103,000 92

2014 863,976,000 834,155,000 97

2015 925,678,000 753,031,000 82

Total 7,092,716,000 6,629,100,000 93

Manitoba** 2006 798,811,000 731,689,000 92

2007 828,121,000 728,675,000 88

2008 865,056,000 723,430,000 84

2009 895,811,000 736,514,000 82

2010 918,905,000 547,320,000 60

2011 935,385,000 850,003,000 91

2012 940,910,000 889,211,000 95

2013 956,350,000 1,009,260,000 106

2014 1,001,770,000 992,897,000 99

2015 1,070,182,000 920,452,000 86

Total 9,211,301,000 8,129,451,000 88

Sources: See Table A5 in the Appendix.

Notes

** The Saskatchewan Auto Fund transitioned to a March 31 year end in 2015. The current ﬁscal period represents the 15 months

ended March 31, 2016.

** Manitoba’s Annual Reports results are based on a Fiscal year ending February 28/29.

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

Starting ﬁrst with the private systems, three points are worthy of

note from table 3. First, the loss ratio in Alberta is the highest in every

year but the last one where it is the same as in the Atlantic Provinces.

Second, Ontario always has the lowest loss ratio of this group. Finally,

except for in 2012 in Ontario, the loss ratios increase every year in

every jurisdiction. If one interprets this ratio as being a measure of

good performance, table 3 suggests that Alberta performs better than

the other jurisdictions (although it is tied with the Atlantic Provinces

in 2015), and Ontario is the worst. Again, caution is required here, for

the reasons stated earlier. The fact that these ratios are rising can be

interpreted as meaning that the industry is performing better. But …

it may also be an indicator of impending ﬁnancial difﬁculty to the

extent that claims being paid out are approaching premiums earned.

On the topic of ﬁnancial difﬁculty, a main source of revenue in the

insurance market is returns to investments. The nature of the insurance

market is such that ﬁrms collect a massive amount of money regularly,

but have much more irregular payouts. Investment income is an import-

ant revenue component. Table 4 presents the average returns on equity

and investment, as well as loss ratios across the country (private prop-

erty and casualty insurance, of which automobile insurance is the

largest component) according to the Insurance Bureau of Canada (Fact

Book, 2017, p.14).

The main point to notice from this table is the

falling rate of return on investments over the 2011 to 2015 period. This

falling rate adversely affects the size of the revenues generated for

insurance companies. As these revenues fall, shortfalls have to be made

up elsewhere—principally through premium hikes or claim reductions.

All insurance regimes are in the same boat when it comes to the prob-

lem of investment income. Although, arguably, public regimes have

recourse to other sources of revenue (discussed brieﬂy below).

Returning to table 3, the bottom half presents the Earned Incurred

Loss Ratio for the three public provinces included in this report. Before

analyzing these data, a few remarks are necessary. In 2015, the

Saskatchewan Auto Fund moved to a March 31st year end and hence

the data for 2015 actually comprise 15 months; the ﬁnancial year is

ended February 28th (29th) in Manitoba; and in 2015 the Insurance

Corporation of British Columbia announced that it was no longer con-

sidering the Loss Ratio as a performance measure effective with the

2015-2017 Service Plan (this was calculated by the author and provided

in table 3).

70 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

TABLE 4 Canada Wide Returns on Investment and Equity

fortheProperty –Causality Insurance



RETURN

EQUITY*

RETURN

INVESTMENT

EARNED LOSS

RATIO

OPERATING

EXPENSE RATIO

COMBINED

RATIO

1993

9.5%

10.7% 77.1% 32.8% 109.9%

1994

6.8% 8.0%

75.7% 31.3% 107.0%

1995

11.7%

9.1%

73.3% 30.8% 104.1%

1996

13.6% 10.3% 72.7% 30.7% 103.4%

1997

13.1% 10.4% 71.4% 31.2% 102.6%

1998

6.8% 8.5%

74.9% 32.9% 107.8%

1999

6.5% 7.3%

72.6% 33.2% 105.9%

2000

6.3% 9.0%

75.9% 32.7% 108.7%

2001

2.6% 7.5%

80.0% 31.0% 111.0%

2002

1.7% 5.4%

76.9% 28.9% 105.8%

2003

11.6%

6.2%

69.9% 28.6%

98.4%

2004

18.1%

5.6%

62.7% 28.2%

91.0%

2005

17.2%

5.9%

64.7% 28.7%

93.4%

2006

16.9%

5.9%

59.5% 28.1%

87.5%

2007

14.1%

5.5%

62.5% 28.5%

91.0%

2008

6.0% 3.9%

70.3% 30.0% 100.3%

2009

6.9% 4.2%

69.5% 30.0%

99.6%

2010

7.6% 4.3%

69.1% 30.2%

99.4%

2011

8.0% 4.2%

68.2% 30.3%

98.4%

2012

10.8%

3.9%

64.7% 30.6%

95.3%

2013

6.9% 3.1%

68.1% 30.8%

98.9%

2014

9.9% 3.9%

66.6% 31.0%

97.6%

2015

10.0%

3.3%

63.5% 31.4%

94.9%

2016

6.0%

**2.7%** 67.6% 31.8%

99.4%

** Excluding Lloyd’s

** As per the latest OSFI regulatory ﬁling forms, which came into effect Q4 2016

Source: Copied directly from: IBC (2017) Facts Book, p. 14, accessed at: http://assets.ibc.ca/Documents/Facts%20Book/Facts_

Book/2017/Fact-Book-2017.pdf

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

Looking across the three public jurisdictions, one ﬁnds quite a bit

of variation in the loss ratio over time. For the ﬁrst ﬁve years of the

data (2006-2010), this ratio basically falls in BC, rises then falls in

Saskatchewan, but not to as low a level as it began in 2006, and falls

in Manitoba (although the rate of 60 in 2010 seems anomalously low).

For the second part of the data series, namely from 2011 to 2015, the

period for which private insurance regime data are also available, dif-

ferent patterns are displayed. It basically rises in BC, falls (but not

continuously) in Saskatchewan, where it began from an anomalously

high level of 111, and rises then falls in Manitoba. Over this latter ﬁve-

year period, the loss ratio in BC is the lowest when compared to

Saskatchewan and Manitoba, except in 2015 when it is the highest. It

is also notable that twice the loss ratio is greater than one—meaning

that claims exceeded earned premiums in that period. Overall, there-

fore, when comparing the loss ratios of the three public auto insurance

provinces of BC, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, it is clear that they ﬂuc-

tuate signiﬁcantly from year to year and that no one single province

has performed consistently or signiﬁcantly better than the others.

BChas remained in the pack.

Altogether there is a remarkable amount of year-to-year variation in

this loss ratio in both the private and public jurisdictions. This obser-

vation suggests that much caution needs to be taken when relying on

this ﬁgure in any given year. It is likely to be meaningful to make a

statement about a continuously rising or continuously falling loss

ratio—such a pattern would be suggestive, but when it regularly goes

up and down, as is observed in table 3, it is difﬁcult to rely on it as an

indicator of performance one way or another. Table 3 provides the total

loss ratio over the period of the data series—one can see quite clearly

that this total loss ratio bears very little resemblance to, say, the loss

ratio of 2015. In BC, for instance, it happens to have the highest loss

ratio in 2015 at 98 across all of the jurisdictions, but, at 86, it has the

lowest total loss ratio across the three public provinces for the ten years

of the data set, followed closely by Manitoba with 88. Ontario, with 66,

has the lowest total loss ratio of all reported jurisdictions.

Comparing across the private and public jurisdictions reveals that

the loss ratio is almost always highest in the public regimes (except

for 2010 in Manitoba). One interpretation of this observation is that

the public regimes are outperforming the private ones insofar as their

claims are closer to earned premiums—but this is too facile an inter-

pretation for the reasons already stated. Moreover, because public

regimes may have more ready access to other sources of revenue typ-

ically not available to private companies, including fees for a variety

72 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

of other, related, services, like drivers’ permits and vehicle registrations,

not to mention the possibility of transfers from general government

revenues, this means that they can operate with a higher loss ratio

relative to the private regimes. Another reason why public regimes may

have a higher loss ratio is that their data include all of the high-risk

drivers—those who would have to resort to a Facility Association in

the private regimes, plus those who drive uninsured.

One might be tempted to compare the average cost of claims by

province. However, as discussed above, public and private regimes are

inherently different in the way in which claims are counted and hence

comparisons across these regimes are inappropriate. Within regime

comparisons can be made. To this end, information on claim and

adjustment expenses previously reported in table 3 can be used, but

now these amounts need to be expressed as ‘real’ dollars to take

account of annual inﬂation. If one does not account for inﬂation, then

rising claim costs may simply be reﬂecting general price increases

rather than other factors. Inﬂation is taken into account by using the

provincial consumer price indices each year.

The year 2011 was cho-

sen as the base (or reference) year, which means that all of the claim

and adjustment expenses are expressed in 2011 dollars. Therefore, in

table 3 the reported ﬁgures for 2011 are identical to those in table 5;

for years prior to 2011, real claim expenses reported in table 5 are

higher than those in table 3, and for years after 2011 they will look

lower in table 5 compared to table 3 as the numbers are expressed in

2011 dollars. Once the ‘real claim costs’ (claim costs and adjustment

expenses from table 3 divided through by the CPI) are obtained, this

number can be divided by the number of claims each year to obtain

the real average cost per claim. Table 5 provides the information on

real claim costs in the column entitled “Real Claim and Adjustment

Expenses Incurred”; and provides the information on the “Real Average

Cost per Claim” in the last column. Remember, that the information in

this last column cannot be compared across public and private regimes

because of the way in which claims are calculated. Looking ﬁrst at the

three private regions (Alberta, Ontario and Atlantic Provinces), the

(real) average cost of claims in Ontario is much higher than in the other

two jurisdictions; the Atlantic Provinces are clearly the lowest on this

measure. Reliable information for Saskatchewan could not be obtained;

hence only two public regimes are reported in table 3. BC has higher

average claim costs when compared to Manitoba.

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

TABLE 5 Number of Earned Vehicles, Number of Claims,

RealClaimandAdjustment Expenses Incurred

andRealAverage Cost perClaim

PROVINCE

COVERAGE AND

ACCIDENT YEAR

NUMBER

OF EARNED

VEHICLES*

NUMBER OF

CLAIMS

REAL CLAIM AND

ADJUSTMENT

EXPENSES

INCURRED

REAL

AVERAGE COST

PER CLAIM

Alberta 2011 2,307,347 246,758 1,737,461,860 7,041

2012 2,396,990 271,795 2,000,952,210 7,362

2013 2,490,256 271,306 2,103,262,579 7,752

2014 2,586,150 280,845 2,241,740,221 7,982

2015 2,656,122 272,353 2,342,841,508 8,602

Total 12,436,866 1,343,057 10,426,258,378 7,748

Atlantic 2011 1,374,134 160,54 777,985,471 4,846

2012 1,401,563 153,552 789,305,161 5,140

2013 1,423,561 157,95 837,298,374 5,301

2014 1,440,100 162,946 857,399,657 5,262

2015 1,459,626 172,949 931,600,368 5,387

Total 7,098,984 807,936 4,193,589,030 5,187

Ontario 2011 6,651,053 610,535 6,322,237,101 10,355

2012 6,766,018 592,948 6,186,853,170 10,434

2013 6,855,617 620,882 6,646,234,839 10,705

2014 6,953,621 634,489 6,776,378,941 10,680

2015 7,080,296 657,761 7,165,265,172 10,893

Total 34,306,604 3,116,615 33,096,969,223 10,613

British Columbia 2006 3,012,000 947,000 3,173,254,158 3,351

2007 3,108,000 992,000 3,086,773,409 3,112

2008 3,193,000 964,000 2,924,573,259 3,034

2009 3,225,000 946,000 3,081,207,146 3,257

2010 3,281,000 895,000 3,147,166,626 3,516

2011 3,321,000 900,000 3,186,563,000 3,541

2012 3,372,000 915,000 3,240,134,987 3,541

2013 3,429,000 917,000 3,399,642,226 3,707

2014 3,493,000 900,000 3,816,215,681 4,240

2015 3,596,000 858,000 4,229,177,766 4,929

Total 33,030,000 9,234,000 33,284,708,259 3,623

→

74 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

PROVINCE

COVERAGE AND

ACCIDENT YEAR

NUMBER

OF EARNED

VEHICLES*

NUMBER OF

CLAIMS

REAL CLAIM AND

ADJUSTMENT

EXPENSES

INCURRED

REAL

AVERAGE COST

PER CLAIM

Manitoba** 2006 269,135 796,982,315 2,543

2007 280,319 777,954,193 2,355

2008 254,856 755,327,266 2,481

2009 267,611 764,270,443 2,381

2010 275,763 563,501,635 1,562

2011 277,201 850,003,000 2,532

2012 287,105 875,166,936 2,559

2013 287,741 971,515,317 2,881

2014 273,244 938,220,310 2,922

2015 297,957 859,475,685 2,667

Total  2,770,932 8,152,417,099 2,488

Sources

See Appendix, Table A5 and Statistics Canada, CANSIM Table 326-0021.

Notes

** Earned Vehicles refers essentially to the number of vehicles insured during the year, taking into account policies that start and

end throughout the year. For instance, if an insurance policy began on July 1st, then it would be counted as a 0.5 of an earned

vehicle during the calendar year.

** Manitoba has a ﬁscal year ending February 28 (29).

4. other Factors InFluencIng

theprIceoFautomoBIle Insurance

Several factors inﬂuence the demand for automobile insurance, not the

least of which is the number of vehicles on the road. Graph 1 presents

the number of motor vehicle registrations per capita per province over

the period 1999 to 2015. A couple of broad points to note: the highest

rate of per capita vehicle registrations is in Alberta, followed, occasion-

ally very closely, by Saskatchewan. These two provinces are clearly

higher than the others. The other regions are more clumped together,

especially until about 2008 when we see Ontario having from then on

the lowest per capita number of vehicles, and from 2009 the Atlantic

Provinces trend upwards moving away from the pack. British Columbia

has had a slight upward trend each year with a per capita rate of 0.57

in 1999 reaching a high of 0.66 in 2015 in par with the rate in Quebec

and Manitoba.

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

GRAPH 1 Per Capital Motor Vehicle Registrations 1999-2015

Sources: 1999 to 2015: Statistics Canada, CANSIM Table 405-0004 (Motor Vehicle Registrations); 1999 to 2015: Statistics

Canada, CANSIM Table 051-0001 (population).

Another factor that inﬂuences the price of insurance is the number

of accidents on the road. Typically, accidents are grouped into three

main types: property-damage only, bodily- injuries, and fatal. The most

comparable data on accidents are those gathered by police reports.

One issue with these data, however, is the practice around when police

are called to the scene. Small property-damage only accidents often

are not attended by police, so these are the least comparable across

jurisdictions. Problems exist with bodily-injury accidents as well insofar

as police presence may not be required if the injuries are minor. The

only type of accident that is accurately reported is fatal accidents—

these tend to provide a good indicator of driving risk over time.

Graph2 presents the rate of fatal accidents per 10,000 registered motor

vehicles from 2002 to 2015 (excluding the Atlantic Provinces). Generally

speaking, there is a downward trend in this rate: all of the rates are

signiﬁcantly lower in 2015 when compared to 2002. In 2002, the two

jurisdictions with the highest fatality rates were Saskatchewan and

British Columbia, with a rate of 1.7 fatal collisions per 10,000 registered

vehicles (as opposed to, say, Ontario at 1.1). By 2015, the BC rate is

clearly lower than that of Saskatchewan—0.9 versus 1.2—and

Saskatchewan continues to have the highest rate. Ontario has the low-

est fatal collision rate across the board except for 2014 when Quebec

held that distinction.

76 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

GRAPH 2 Fatal Vehicle Collisions per 10,000 Registered Vehicles

Sources

See table A5.

Notes

1. Ontario Statistics for 2015 and 2016 are preliminary statistics as of June 2017.

2. “Fatal Motor Vehicle collisions” include all reported motor vehicle crashes that resulted in at least one death, where death

occurred within 30 days of the collision, except in Quebec before 2007 (eight days).

5. a Few words on puBlIc versus

prIvateprovIsIon oF Insurance

The question as to whether automobile insurance is best provided by

a public monopoly as opposed to by private insurers is one that has

received little attention of late, but has been addressed in waves over

the past decades. Currently, the public versus private debate rages on

in the health care area, especially in the United States with its range

of public, private and non- proﬁt provision of medical services.

When it comes to the public versus private ‘debate’, much hinges on

the impact of competition on prices and quality in comparison to

potential cost savings associated with monopoly provision. In short—

the big question centres on whether or not the provision of (automo-

bile) insurance is subject to large enough economies of scale to warrant

a public monopoly. Very little empirical work has been done on this

question for automobile insurance. Kennedy (1976) wrote a PhD thesis

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

on this private versus public issue, and used as a case study the expe-

rience in Manitoba, with the introduction of its Autopac public insur-

ance program in November, 1971, a couple of years before the ICBC

creation in March, 1974.

He compares this public provider with the

private system in Alberta and concludes that neither had a clearly

superior product (p.117) and that coordinating the licensing of drivers

and vehicles with the provision of insurance led to fewer uninsured

drivers on the road in Manitoba relative to Alberta, but that more prod-

uct variety was available in the private system. He found that the price

of basic coverage was cheaper in Alberta but for complete coverage,

Manitoba was superior, although Autopac was allowed to run a deﬁcit,

which complicated this comparison.

6. concludIng remarks

This article has used care and caution in presenting and analyzing data

on automobile insurance regimes. By now, it should be clear that very

few deﬁnite conclusions can be drawn. So what can be said? A partic-

ularly informative table is table 1 which provides a synthesis of the

price quotes obtained by jurisdiction. From this table, two main con-

clusions can be drawn: prices charged in BC are in line with those of

Manitoba (with some nuancing: for instance, BC tends to penalize poor

driving records much more than either of the other public provinces).

This holds true even though the demand for insurance in BC far

exceeds that of the other two public provinces. A driver in Vancouver

pays signiﬁcantly less than an otherwise comparable driver in Toronto.

The population in Toronto is larger which may justify some of this

difference, but still the difference in some cases is quite remarkable.

One measure of performance is the earned incurred loss ratio which

is reported in table 3; this paper has discussed why this ratio is not

comparable across public and private regimes. In the private system,

Ontario has the lowest loss ratios; in the public system, there is no dis-

cernable, stable, relationship across the three jurisdictions. BC is in

thepack.

Average claim costs cannot be compared across regimes. In fact, one

deﬁnite conclusion that can be made from this work is the extent to

which differences in the way in which data are gathered in public

versus private jurisdictions render comparisons across these two types

of jurisdictions quite meaningless.

78 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

Road riskiness as measured by fatal accidents per 10,000 vehicles is

falling over time. This is good news. Information on other types of

accidents are not comparable either across jurisdictions or, indeed,

across time within the same jurisdiction because of reporting rules.

NOTES

1 This article was originally written for the Trial Lawyers Association (TLA) of BC to provide an inter-

provincial comparison of automobile insurance regimes in Canada. This project was undertaken on the strict

understanding that data would be analyzed and conclusions would be reached from a neutral viewpoint,

without any prior expectation one way or another. The TLA was agreeable to these terms.

2 From the Kanetix web site (see next footnote), these records are deﬁned speciﬁcally as follows:

Clean Record

• At fault accidents in last 10 years: None

• Not at fault accidents in last 10 years: None

• Non-accident claims in last 6 years: None

• Tickets in last 3 years (not including parking tickets): None

Poor Record

• At fault accidents in last 10 years: One

– Partially at fault accident

• Not at fault accidents in last 10 years: None

• Non-accident claims in last 6 years: None

• Tickets in last 3 years (not including parking tickets): One

– Speeding

3 The auto insurance price quotes were obtained from: https://www.kanetix.ca/auto-insurance. This web

site harvests quotes from a long list of companies, found here: https://www.kanetix.ca/about_suppliers_gen.

4 Quebec is omitted partly because the insurance price includes driver license and registration fees and

it was too difﬁcult to render this price comparable to the others.

5 These were the minimum prices quoted from speciﬁed insurance companies from the Kanetix web site

previously mentioned.

6 For Ontario, Kanetix provided an unidentiﬁed lowest price, but not for the other provinces.

7 All population data in this section are from the 2016 census, retrieved from CANSIM table number:

051-0001.

8 https://www.gisa.ca/

9 https://www.gisa.ca/Documents/View/2168 (p.6).

10 http://assets.ibc.ca/Documents/Facts%20Book/Facts_Book/2017/Fact-Book-2017.pdf, accessed

May16, 2017.

11 From ICBC Annual Report 2014, p. 10, retrieved at: http://www.icbc.com/about-icbc/company-info/

Documents/ar14.pdf.

12 Notice this it was not necessary to deﬂate these numbers for table 2 as both the numerator and

denominator were monetary amounts. CPI All Items, 2011=100 (2011 is the base year) was employed.

13 K. F. Kennedy “A Case Study in Private Vs. Public Enterprise: The Manitoba Experience with Automobile

Insurance”, PhD thesis, 1976, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Business Administration.

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

APPENDIX TABLES

80 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

TABLE A1a Mandated Policy for Private Provinces

BENEFITS ALBERTA ONTARIO NEW BRUNSWICK NOVA SCOTIA

NEWFOUNDLAND

ANDLABRADOR

PRINCE EDWARD

ISLAND

Mandatory Minimum

Third-party Liability

$200,000 available

for any one accident.

For claims involving

both bodily injury and

property damage, claim

for property damage

capped at $10,000.

$200,000 available

for any one accident.

For claims involving

both bodily injury and

property damage, claim

for property damage

capped at $10,000.

$200,000 available for

any one accident. For

claims involving both

bodily injury and property

damage, claim for

property damage capped

at $20,000.

$500,000 available for

any one accident.

$200,000 available

for any one accident.

For claims involving

both bodily injury and

property damage, claim

for property damage

capped at $20,000.

$200,000 available

for any one accident.

For claims involving

both bodily injury and

property damage, claim

for property damage

capped at $10,000.

Medical, Rehabilitation

andAttendant care

Up to $50,000/person. Up to $3,500 for minor

injury. Up to $65 000/

person for non-minor

and non- catastrophic

injuries. Up to $1 million

for catastrophic injury.

Up to $50,000/person;

four-year time limit.

Up to $50,000/person;

four-year time limit

(Consumers have

option to purchase

additional coverage).

(Optional to buy)

Up to $25,000/person;

four-year time limit.

Up to $50,000/person;

four-year time limit.

Funeral Expenses Up to $5,000. Up to $6 000. (Amount

may be higher if

optional indexation

coverage is

purchased).

Up to $2,500. Up to $2,500. (Optional to buy)

Up to $1,000.

Up to $2,500.

Disability Income Beneﬁts:

Income Replacement 80% of gross weekly

wages to maximum

$400/week; 104 weeks

for total disability.*

70% of gross wages to

maximum $400/week

for 104 weeks (longer

if victim isunable to

pursue any suitable

occupation).*

Maximum

$250/week; 104

weeks for partial

disability, lifetime for

total disability. Must be

disabled for at least

seven days to qualify.

Maximum $250/week;

104 weeks for partial

disability, lifetime for

total disability; must be

disabled for at least

seven days to qualify.

(Optional to buy)

Up to $140/week;

104 weeks for partial

disability; lifetime for

total disability; must

be disabled for at least

seven days to qualify.

Maximum $250/week;

104 weeks for partial

disability, lifetime for

total disability; must

be disabled for at least

seven days to qualify.

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

BENEFITS ALBERTA ONTARIO NEW BRUNSWICK NOVA SCOTIA

NEWFOUNDLAND

ANDLABRADOR

PRINCE EDWARD

ISLAND

Non-earners $135/week, up to 26

weeks.

$185/week for

104weeks; 4-week

wait; limit two years.

(SeeNote 1).

N/A N/A N/A N/A

Homemaker N/A $100/week up to

104weeks.

$100/week up to

52weeks.

$100/week up to

52weeks.

$70/week, up to

12weeks.

$100/week up to

52weeks.

Death Beneﬁts

Surviving Spouse Death of head of

household: $10,000,

plus 20% ($2,000) for

each dependent survivor

after ﬁrst, plus additional

$15,000 for ﬁrst survivor

and $4,000 for each

remaining survivor;

Death of spouse/adult

interdependent partner

of head of household

$10,000.

Death within 180 days of

accident (or three years

if continuously disabled

prior to death); $25,000

minimum. (Amount may

be higher if optional

indexation coverage

ispurchased).

Death within 180 days

(or two years if

continuously disabled

prior to death) of:

Head of household,

$50,000 plus $1,000 to

each dependent after

ﬁrst; Spouse/partner,

$25,000.

Death within 180 days

(or two years if

continuously disabled

prior to death) of: Head

of household $25,000

plus $1,000 to each

dependent after ﬁrst.

Spouse/partner $25,000.

(Optional to buy)

Deathwithin 180days

(or two years if

continuously disabled

prior to death) of: Head

of household, $10,000,

plus $1,000 to each

dependent survivor after

ﬁrst; Spouse, $10,000.

Death within 180 days

(or two years if

continuously disabled

prior to death) of: Head

of household $50,000

plus $1,000 to each

dependent after ﬁrst;

Spouse/partner $25,000.

Surviving Dependent Death of head of

household: $10,000,

plus 20% ($2,000) for

each dependent survivor

after ﬁrst, plus additional

$15,000 for ﬁrst survivor

and $4,000 for each

remaining survivor;

Death of spouse/adult

interdependent partner

of head of household

$10,000.

Death within 180 days of

accident (or three years

if continuously disabled

prior to death); $10,000

each. (Amount may

be higher if optional

indexation coverage is

purchased).

Death within 180 days

(or two years if

continuously disabled

prior to death) of:

Head of household,

$50,000 plus $1,000 to

each dependent after

ﬁrst; Spouse/partner,

$25,000.

Death within 180 days

(or two years if

continuously disabled

prior to death) of: Head

of household $25,000

plus $1,000 to each

dependent after ﬁrst.

Spouse/partner $25,000.

(Optional to buy) Death

within 180 days (or two

years if continuously

disabled prior to death)

of: Head of household,

$10,000, plus $1,000 to

each dependent survivor

after ﬁrst; Spouse,

$10,000.

Death within 180days

(or two years if

continuously disabled

prior to death) of: Head

of household $50,000

plus $1,000 to each

dependent after ﬁrst;

Spouse/partner $25,000.

→

82 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

BENEFITS ALBERTA ONTARIO NEW BRUNSWICK NOVA SCOTIA

NEWFOUNDLAND

ANDLABRADOR

PRINCE EDWARD

ISLAND

No Dependent N/A $10,000 per survivor.

(Amount may be

higher if optional

indexation coverage

ispurchased).

N/A N/A N/A N/A

Parent/Guardian Death of dependent

relative: according to

age, maximum $3,000.

$10,000 per survivor. Death within 180days

(or two years if

continuously disabled

prior to death) of

dependant, $5,000.

Death within 180days

(or two years if

continuously disabled

prior to death) of

dependant $5,000.

(Optional to buy) Death

within 180 days (or two

years if continuously

disabled prior to death)

of dependant $2,000.

Death within 180days

(or two years if

continuously disabled

prior to death) of

dependant $5,000.

Right to sue for pain

and suffering?

Yes. If injury is deemed

“minor” under provincial

legislation, maximum

award is $5,020.

Yes, if injury meets

severity test (called

“threshold”), and subject

to deductible. (See

Note 2).

Yes. If injury is deemed

“minor” under provincial

legislation, maximum

award is $7,818.87.

Yes. If injury is deemed

“minor” under provincial

legislation, maximum

award is $8,486.

Yes. Awards are subject

to deductible of $2,500.

Yes. If injury is deemed

“minor” under provincial

regulation, maximum

award is $7,545.

Right to sue for

economic loss in excess

of no-fault beneﬁts?

Yes Yes. (See Note 3). Yes Yes. Yes. Yes.

Sources

• Automobile Accident Insurance Beneﬁts Regulations, accessed at: www.qp.alberta.ca/1266.cfm?page=1972_352.cfm&leg_type=Regs&isbncln=0779751140;

• Alberta Standard Automobile Policy, S.P.F. No. 1, accessed at: http://www.ﬁnance.alberta.ca/publications/insurance/automobile-insurance/policies-forms-certiﬁcates/

SPF1- Standard-Automobile-Policy-2013.pdf;

• Alberta Superintendent of Insurance Bulletin 07-2016, accessed at: http://www.ﬁnance.alberta.ca/publications/insurance/bulletins-notices/2016/Superintendent-of-Insurance- 2016-07-Bulletin.pdf;

• Alberta Superintendent of Insurance Bulletin 05-2015, accessed at: http://www.ﬁnance.alberta.ca/publications/insurance/bulletins-notices/2015/Superintendent-of-Insurance- 2015-05-Bulletin.pdf;

• Alberta Superintendent of Insurance Bulletin 11-2014, accessed at: http://www.ﬁnance.alberta.ca/publications/insurance/bulletins-notices/2014/Superintendent-of-Insurance- 2014-11-Bulletin.pdf;

• New Brunswick Standard Owner’s Policy N.B.P.F. No.1, accessed at: http://0101.nccdn.net/1_5/1c2/1a0/1a9/StandardOwnersPolicy.pdf (Effective October 1, 2010); Injury Regulation, NB Reg 2003-20,

accessed at: www.canlii.org/en/nb/laws/regu/nb-reg-2003-20/106597/nb-reg-2003-20.html;

• Financial and Consumer Services Commission. Notice Re: Annual Indexation PDF, accessed at: http://0104.nccdn.net/1_5/156/05b/0a6/January-2017-Annual-Indexation- Notice.pdf;

• Financial and Consumer Services Commission: Automobile Insurance, accessed at: http://fcnb.ca/automobile-insurance.html;

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

• Automobile Insurance Act, Chapter A-22, an Act Respecting Automobile Insurance, accessed at: http://assembly.nl.ca/Legislation/sr/statutes/a22.htm; Newfoundland & Labrador Standard Automobile Policy

S.P.F. No.1 (not available online);

• Newfoundland & Labrador Standard Automobile Policy S.P.F. No.1 (not available online)

• Nova Scotia Standard Automobile Policy NSPF No.1, 2013, accessed at: www.novascotia.ca/ﬁnance/site-ﬁnance/media/ﬁnance/SPF1-64103-01_2013.pdf; Automobile Insurance Contract Mandatory

Conditions Regulations, accessed at: www.novascotia.ca/just/regulations/regs/imandcon.htm;

• Ofﬁce of the Superintendent of Insurance Bulletin: Minor Injury Cap, accessed at: http://www.novascotia.ca/ﬁnance/site-ﬁnance/media/ﬁnance/Cap_Bulletin-Jan_2017.pdf; Ontario Automobile Policy,

accessed at: www.fsco.gov.on.ca/en/auto/forms/Documents/OAP-1-Application-and-Endorsement-Forms/1215E.1.pdf;

• Statutory Accident Beneﬁts Schedule (SABS), Insurance Act, O. Reg. 34/10, accessed at: accessed at: www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/english/elaws_regs_100034_e.htm; Financial Services Commission of

Ontario: Auto Bulletins, accessed at: www.fsco.gov.on.ca/en/auto/autobulletins/Pages/default.asp;

• Insurance Act, RSPEI 1988, c I-4, accessed at: www.gov.pe.ca/law/statutes/pdf/i-04.pdf;

• Prince Edward Island Standard Automobile Policy S.P.F. No.1, for accidents occurring on or after October 1, 2014, accessed at: www.gov.pe.ca/photos/original/ELJ_SampleAuto.pdf;

• Prince Edward Island Standard Automobile Policy S.P.F. No.1, for accidents occurring on or after October 1, 2015, accessed at: www.gov.pe.ca/photos/original/JPS_SampleAuto.pdf;

• Bill 46, An Act to Amend the Insurance Act (No. 2) (Chapter 36), accessed at: http://www.assembly.pe.ca/bills/pdf_chapter/64/4/chapter-36.pdf

• Ofﬁce of Superintendent of Insurance Bulletin: Automobile Insurance Minor Injury Cap - Indexation, accessed at: http://www.gov.pe.ca/photos/original/MinInjCap2017.pdf; October 1, 2015, Automobile

Insurance Reforms, accessed at: www.gov.pe.ca/photos/original/JPS_InsReform.p

• Prince Edward Island Superintendent of Insurance—Notices, accessed at: www.gov.pe.ca/jps/index.php3?number=1053687&lang=E.

Notes

** Nothing for ﬁrst seven days of disability.

** Nothing for ﬁrst seven days of disability unless catastrophically injured.

1. For Ontario the “Non-Earners Beneﬁt” is not available if the insured is eligible for, and elects to receive, the income replacement or caregiver beneﬁt; Income replacement award above no-fault beneﬁt is based

on net income after deductions for income tax, Canada Pension and Employment Insurance.

2. Lawsuit allowed only if injured person dies or sustains permanent and serious disﬁgurement and/or impairment of important physical, mental or psychological function. The court assesses damages and deducts

$36,905 ($18,453 for a Family Law Act claim).

3. Injured person may sue for 70% of net income loss before trial, 100% of gross after trial; also for medical, rehabilitation and related costs when injury meets severity test for pain and suffering claims.

84 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

TABLE A1b Mandated Policy for Public Provinces

BENEFITS BRITISH COLUMBIA SASKATCHEWAN MANITOBA QUEBEC

Mandatory Minimum

Third-party Liability

$200,000 available for any

one accident. For claims

involving both bodily injury

and property damage,

property damage will be

capped at $20,000.

$200,000 available for any one accident. For claims involving

both bodily injury and property damage, property damage will

be capped at $10,000.

$200,000 available for any

one accident. For claims

involving both bodily injury

and property damage,

property damage will be

capped at $20,000.

$50,000 available for any

one accident; liability limits

relate to property damage

claims within Quebec and to

personal injury and property

damage claims outside

Quebec.

Medical, Rehabilitation

andAttendant care

Up to $150,000/person. If no-fault option selected:

Up to $6,813,680/person.

If tort option selected:

Up to $26,667/person for

non-catastrophic injury;

Up to $200,000/person for

catastrophic injury.

No time or amount limit. No time or amount limit.

Funeral Expenses Up to $2,500 Up to $10,219. Up to $6,667. Up to $8,409. Up to $5,178.

Disability Income

Income Replacement 75% of gross weekly wages

to maximum $300/week;

104 weeks for temporary

disability; lifetime for total

disability.*

90% of net income based

on gross annual income of

maximum $94,587/year.**

$429/week for total disability;

$214/week for partial

disability up to two years;

maximum $22,308/year.

90% of net wages based

on gross annual income of

maximum $94,500/year.*

90% of net wages based

on gross annual income of

maximum $72,500/year;

indexed.*

Non-earners N/A After 180 days, will receive

at least minimum wage if still

disabled.

$429/week for total disability;

$214/week for partial

disability up to two years;

maximum $22,308/year.

After 180 days, will receive at

least minimum wage.

After 180 days, will receive at

least minimum wage.

Homemaker $145/week, up to 104 weeks. After 180 days, will receive

at least minimum wage if still

disabled.

$429/week for total disability;

$214/week for partial

disability up to two years;

maximum $22,308/year.

N/A N/A

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

Death Beneﬁts

Surviving Spouse Death following a collision

of: Head of household

$5,000, plus $145/week

up to 104weeks; Partner/

Spouse of head of household

$2,500, plus $145/week up

to 104weeks.

45% of deceased’s net

income to a maximum gross

salary of $94,587 peryear.

45% of deceased’s net

income to a maximum gross

salary of $94,587 per year.

Death any time after injury:

Depends on wage and age

of deceased and range from

$61,706 to $472,500.

Death any time after

accident: Beneﬁts depend

on gross annual income

multiplied by a factor

between one and ﬁve,

depending on age of the

victim; range from $69,102

to $362,500.

Surviving Dependent Death following a collision of:

Head of household $1,000,

plus $35/week up to 104

weeks to each child; Partner/

Spouse of head of household:

$2,500, plus $145/week up

to 104 weeks to each child.

5% of the deceased’s net

income per dependent child.

5% of the deceased’s net

income per dependent child.

Death any time after injury:

Depends on the dependant’s

age at time of accident

and range from $29,309 to

$53,993, plus $26,995 for a

disabled dependent.

Death any time after

accident: Beneﬁts depend on

dependent child’s age; Range

from $32,822 to$60,466.

No Dependent N/A $15,620 maximum per

survivor/estate; $70,293

maximum total payable.

Up to $13,333 to estate. Death any time after injury:

Up to $13, 741 per survivor.

Death any time after

accident: If there is no

surviving spouse/dependant,

parents or estate receive

$55,386.

Parent/Guardian Death following a collision of

dependent child: according to

age, maximum $1,500.

Death of dependent child:

$31,240.

N/A N/A Death any time after

accident: If there is no

surviving spouse/dependant,

parents or estate receive

$55,386.

Impairment beneﬁts N/A Up to $195,257 /person for

non-catastrophic injury and

up to $238,479/person for

catastrophic injury.

Up to $13,333/person for

non-catastrophic injury;

Up to $173,333/person for

catastrophic injury.

Minimum $770/week

up to $154,261 for non-

catastrophic injury; Up to

$243,580 for catastrophic

injury.

Up to $242,311.

→

86 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

Right to sue for pain

andsuffering?

Yes Yes Yes, subject to deductible

of$5,000.

No No

Right to sue for

economicloss in excess

ofno-fault beneﬁts?

Yes Yes Yes Yes No

Sources

• ICBC Autoplan Insurance, accessed at: http://www.icbc.com/autoplan/Documents/autoplan-insurance.pdf; Guide to Autopac, accessed at: http://www.mpi.mb.ca/en/PDFs/PolicyGuide2017.pdf;

• Basic Personal Injury Protection Plan (PIPP) Beneﬁts, accessed at: https://www.mpi.mb.ca/en/Claims/BI/Pages/beneﬁts.aspx; Services and Support Guide for Fatality Claims, accessed at: https://www.mpi.

mb.ca/en/PDFs/SupportGuideFatalityClaims.pdf; SGI Canada Personal Injury Coverage, accessed at: https://www.sgi.sk.ca/individuals/registration/personalautoinjury/;

• Your Guide to No Fault Coverage, 2017, accessed at: https://www.sgi.sk.ca/pdf/guide_nofault_2017.pdf; Your Guide to Tort Coverage, 2017, accessed at: https://www.sgi.sk.ca/pdf/guide_tort_2017.pdf;

• SGI Auto Pak Policy booklet, 2017, accessed at: http://www.sgicanada.ca/sk/pdf/booklets/2017_auto_pak.pdf;

• Quebec Auto Insurance Policy Form Q.P.F. No.1, March 1, 2014, accessed at: https://lautorite.qc.ca/ﬁleadmin/lautorite/professionnels/formulaires-professionnels/assureur/automobile/qpf_1.pdf

• The Insurance Policy for All Quebecers: Accident Victim, accessed at: www.saaq.gouv.qc.ca/en/accident_victim/insurance_policy/index.php Calculation of Death Beneﬁts, 2017, accessed at:

www.saaq.gouv.qc.ca/en/accident_victim/insurance_policy/death_table.php;

• IBC Fact Book 2017, http://assets.ibc.ca/Documents/Facts%20Book/Facts_Book/2017/Fact-Book-2017.pdf.

Notes

** Nothing for ﬁrst seven days of disability.

** Nothing for ﬁrst seven days of disability unless catastrophically injured.

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

TABLE A2 Factors Affecting Insurance Prices by Province

CRITERIA

PRIVATE PUBLIC

AB ON NB NS PEI NL BC SK MB QC

Personal Proﬁle

Age Yes Yes No No Yes No No No No Public: No; Private: Yes

Marital Status Yes Yes No No * No No No No Public: No; Private: *

Gender Yes Yes No Yes * No No No No Public: No; Private: Yes

Driving Record Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Claim record of Policy Holder Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Vehicle

Make, Model and Year of Vehicle Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Rate Class Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Territory Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes

Optional Coverage

Optional Coverage Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Amount of Deductible Paid Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Discounts and Savings Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Sources

• Age Rating in Auto Insurance, Actuarial Equity or Unfair Discrimination? (2007), accessed at: http://www.contingencies.org/septoct07/age.pdf; Alberta AIRB Factors that Affect Premiums, accessed at:

http://www.airb.alberta.ca/drivers/factors.aspx;

• Alberta AIRB Ways to Lower Your Premium, accessed at: http://www.airb.alberta.ca/drivers/ways_to_lower.aspx; How has your Alberta auto insurance premium been determined, accessed at:

• http://www.melochemonnex.com/car-insurance/articles/autoinfo-alberta;

→

88 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

• ICBC Autoplan Insurance Guide (For policies with an effective date before Sept. 11, 2016), accessed at: http://www.icbc.com/autoplan/Documents/autoplan-insurance.pdf; ICBC Autoplan Insurance, What

Affects Your Autoplan Premium? accessed at: http://www.icbc.com/autoplan/costs/Pages/Default.aspx;

• MPI Guide to Autopac 2017 (Effective March 1, 2017), accessed at: https://www.mpi.mb.ca/en/PDFs/PolicyGuide2017.pdf; Final Report on Public Automobile Insurance in New Brunswick - Appendix C,

accessed at: http://www.gnb.ca/legis/business/committees/reports/2004auto/PDF/Appendix_A_J-e.pdf;

• NEW BRUNSWICK REGULATION 2004-139 under the Insurance Act (O.C. 2004-530), accessed at: https://www.canlii.org/en/nb/laws/regu/nb-reg-2004-139/latest/nb-reg-2004-139.html;

• Communication New Brunswick, Justice and Consumer Affairs, News Release: New auto insurance territories announced (07/07/11), accessed at: http://www.gnb.ca/cnb/news/jus/2007e0898ju.htm;

• News Releases Government of Newfoundland & Labrador—Canada, Government Services: Province Recognized for One of the Lowest Auto Insurance Premiums in the Country, accessed at:

http://www.releases.gov.nl.ca/releases/2007/gs/0216n03.htm;

• ICBC Buying Auto Insurance: How Auto Insurance Premiums Are Calculated, accessed at: http://www.ibc.ca/nl/auto/buying-auto-insurance; A Consumer’s Auto Insurance Guide 2nd Edition, accessed at:

• http://www.novascotia.ca/ﬁnance/site-ﬁnance/media/ﬁnance/AutoInsuranceGuideConsumer.pdf;

• Nova Scotia Insurance Review Board, Report: To the Governor in Council on a Study into the Use of Gender as a Rating Factor in Automobile Insurance in Nova Scotia (November 1, 2004), accessed at:

https://nsuarb.novascotia.ca/sites/default/ﬁles/nsirbgenderstudy.pdf

• FSCO, How Your Auto Insurance Rates are Set, accessed at: https://www.fsco.gov.on.ca/en/auto/brochures/Pages/how-your-auto-insurance-rates-are-set.aspx;

• Prince Edward Island, Regulatory & Appeals Commission, FAQ: Auto Insurance Regulation, accessed at: http://www.irac.pe.ca/document.aspx?ﬁle=faq/documents/auto-insurance-faq.asp,

• IBC An update from Prince Edward Island’s home, Auto and Business Insurers 2015, accessed at: http://assets.ibc.ca/Documents/Facts%20Book/Industry_Updates/2015/PEI-SOI.pdf;

• 2014 Final Report on Public Automobile Insurance in New Brunswick - Appendix A, accessed at: http://www.gnb.ca/legis/business/committees/reports/2004auto/PDF/Appendix_A_J-e.pdf;

• Kanetix, Car insurance in Quebec: A two-pronged approach, accessed at: https://www.kanetix.ca/quebec-car-insurance-canada;

• Lowestrates.ca, Compare Car Insurance Quotes to Get the Lowest Rates in Saskatchewan, accessed at: http://www.lowestrates.ca/insurance/auto/Saskatchewan.

Note

* Not clear regarding effect of this factor on price.

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

TABLE A3 Components of the Complete Insurance Package

andMinimum Possible Liability Limits

PROVINCE

THIRD PARTY

LIABILITY

COLLISION AND

COMPREHENSIVE

DEDUCTIBLES

THIRD PARTY

LIABILITY

COLLISION AND

COMPREHENSIVE

DEDUCTIBLES

Private

Ontario (Toronto) 1,000,000 No Coverage 2,000,000 500, 500

Alberta (Calgary) 1,000,000 No Coverage 2,000,000 500, 500

Quebec (Montreal) 1,000,000 No Coverage 2,000,000 500, 500

NS (Halifax) 1,000,000 No Coverage 2,000,000 500, 500

PEI (Charlottetown) 1,000,000 No Coverage 2,000,000 500, 500

NB (Moncton) 1,000,000 No Coverage 2,000,000 500, 500

NL (St John’s) 1,000,000 No Coverage 2,000,000 500, 500

Public

Manitoba (Winnipeg) 200,000 500,500 2,000,000 200, 200

Saskatchewan

(Saskatoon)

200,000 700,700 2,000,000 200, 200

British Columbia

Vancouver)

200,000 No Coverage 3,000,000 300, 300

Sources

• MPI Insurance, accessed at: https://www.mpi.mb.ca/en/Reg-and-Ins/Insurance/Optional- Autopac/Pages/orv_additional_

coverage.aspx

• Basic plate insurance vs. Auto Pak, accesses at: https://www.sgicanada.ca/sk/individuals/autoextension/compare.html;

SGICanada Auto extension insurance, accessed at: https://www.sgicanada.ca/sk/individuals/autoextension/index.html;

Autoplan Insurance, Basic Coverage, accessed at: http://www.icbc.com/autoplan/basic/Pages/default.aspx;

• Autoplan Insurance, Optional Coverage: Accessed at: http://www.icbc.com/autoplan/optional/Pages/Default.aspx.

Note

Complete Coverage for the provinces includes: Changing the Comprehensive Deductibles and Collision Deductible amounts

respectively; Increased Third-Party Liability Limits; Loss of Use coverage and Rental vehicle coverage (excluding Manitoba).

90 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

TABLE A4a Insurance Price Quotes for Private Provinces: Good Record

COMPANY

ALBERTA, CALGARY ONTARIO, TORONTO

Basic Coverage Complete Coverage Basic Coverage Complete Coverage

Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male

**Lowest 660 660 1,162 1,162 1,185 1,234 1,575 1,629

Unspeciﬁed      1,285  1,727

Belairdirect     1,958 1,855 2,309 2,194

CAA     2,771 2,771 3,409 3,409

Coachman     3,460 3,460 4,071 4,071

Echelon     3,766 3,505 4,724 4,463

Economical 669 667 1,337 1,345 1,671 1,848 2,143 2,354

Johnson Home-Auto *698* *698* *1,223* *1,223* 1,696 1,696 1,930 1,930

PAFCO     3,948 3,948  

Pembridge 679 679 1,286 1,286 3,147 3,132 3,755 3,755

TD 822 839 1,492 1,549 1,917 1,682 2,240 2,010

Travelers Dominion     1,783 1,851 2,152 2,241

Wawanesa     2,183 2,183 2,589 2,589

SSQauto        

The Co-operators *771* *771* *1,643* *1,683* 1,725 1,661 2,343 2,268

Allstate 835 835 1,439 1,439 3,525 3,507 3,486 3,428

COSECO        

Intact 916 902 1,897 1,954 2,011 1,859 2,439 2,307

Millennium   1,265 1,265    

Desjardins 978 866 1,610 1,517 1,406  1,815 

Average 796 782 1,466 1,473 2,464 2,497 2,815 2,848

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

TABLE A4a continued: Insurance Price Quotes for Private Provinces: Good Record

COMPANY

MONCTON, NB HALIFAX, NS CHARLOTTETOWN, PEI ST JOHNS, NL

Basic

Coverage

Complete

Coverage

Basic

Coverage

Complete

Coverage

Basic

Coverage

Complete

Coverage

Basic

Coverage

Complete

Coverage

Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male

**Lowest 774 774 956 956 658 658 1,120 1,120 391 391 993 993    

CAA 802 802 1,214 1,214            

Johnson Home-Auto *587* *587* *1,049* *1,049* *690* *690* *1,032* *1,032* *606* *606* *1,017* *1,017* 918* 918* 1,329 1,329

TD *745* *745* *1,085* *1,085* *653* *643* *1,114* *1,123* *440* *439* *1,213* *1,258* 1,106* 1,106* *1,791* *1,791*

The Co-operators *898* *898* *1,349* *1,349* *896* *883* *1,433* *1,421* *629* *629* *1,062* *1,062* 1,751* 1,751* *2,377* *2,377*

CAA Atlantic *843* *843* *1,283* *1,283* *658* *658* *1,130* *1,130* *391* *391* *1,002* *1,002*    

Allstate     924 924 1,162 1,162        

COSECO   *1,099* *1,099*   1,146 1,190        

Average 775 775 1,180 1,180 764 760 1,170 1,176 517 516 1,074 1,085 1,258 1,258 1,832 1,832

Sources

1. Quotes were obtained from the Kanetix website (* indicates quotes obtained directly from the respective Insurance Companies website); Kanetix harvests quotes from different companies, but those companies

do not necessarily quote for all cities.

2. ** Kanetix provides a “lowest rate” but does not identify it until the consumer calls for a quote.

Notes

1. All quotes exclude the respective registration costs and any applicable taxes in each province.

2. “Average” excludes “lowest unspeciﬁed rate”.

92 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

TABLE 4Ab Insurance Price Quotes for Private Provinces: Poor Record

COMPANY

ALBERTA, CALGARY ONTARIO, TORONTO

Basic Coverage Complete Coverage Basic Coverage Complete Coverage

Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male

**Lowest 1,008 1,031 1,843 1,915 2,286 2,081 2,847 2,691

Belairdirect     4,402 4,123 5,159 4,847

CAA     6,572 6,572 7,809 7,809

Coachman     4,749 4,749 5,512 5,512

Echelon     5,243 4,979 6,408 6,144

Economical 1,236 1,236 2,688 2,688 3,393 3,755 4,148 4,572

Johnson Home-Auto 1,226 1,226 2,481 2,481    

PAFCO     4,482 4,482  

Pembridge 1,223 1,223 2,856 2,856 5,621 5,562 6,997 6,938

Travelers Dominion

Product

    2,896 3,022 3,476 3,639

Wawanesa     3,748 3,748 4,355 4,355

SSQauto        

The Co-operators     2,585 2,493 3,416 3,306

Intact 1,216 1,216 2,594 2,682 4,528 4,190 5,307 5,003

Allstate 1,216 1,216 2,862 2,991 6,370 6,298 7,802 7,730

Millennium   2,496 2,496    

Raptors Home+Auto     2,538 2,634 3,149 3,255

Average 1,223 1,223 2,663 2,699 4,394 4,354 5,295 5,259

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

TABLE A4b continued: Insurance Price Quotes for Private Provinces: Poor Record

COMPANY

MONCTON, NB HALIFAX, NS CHARLOTTETOWN, PEI

Basic Coverage Complete Coverage Basic Coverage Complete Coverage Basic Coverage Complete Coverage

Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male

**Lowest 1,934 1,934 2,632 2,632 1,374 1,374 2,143 2,143 888 888 1,958 1,958

TD * 933* * 933* *1,432* *1,432* * 856* * 845* *1,464* *1,479* *554* *554* *1,545* *1,604*

CAA Atlantic *2,035* **2,035* *2,776* *2,776* *1,374* *1,374* 2,153* *2,153* 887* 887* *1,967* *1,967*

Average 1,484 1,484 2,104 2,104 1,115 1,110 1,809 1,816 721 721 1,756 1,786

Sources

do not necessarily quote for all cities.

2. ** Kanetix provides a “lowest rate” but does not identify it until the consumer calls for a quote.

Notes

1. All quotes exclude the respective registration costs and any applicable taxes in each province.

2. “Average” excludes “lowest unspeciﬁed rate”.

94 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

TABLE A4c Insurance Price Quotes for Public Provinces: Good Record

COMPANY

BRITISH COLUMBIA, VANCOUVER SASKATCHEWAN, SASKATOON MANITOBA, WINNIPEG

Basic Coverage Complete Coverage Basic Coverage Basic Coverage Complete Coverage Complete Coverage

ICBC Basic Autoplan ICBC SGI Basic Plate ICBC Basic Autoplan ICBC MPI

Manitoba Public Insurance     1,167 1,451

Saskatchewan Government Insurance   917 1,125  

Afﬁnity Insurance Services Inc Lakewood   917 1,125  

Afﬁnity Insurance Services Inc Preston Ave.   917 1,142  

Life Line General Insurance Inc   917 1,125  

Hoffmann Kool Insurance   917 1,135  

Galon Insurance Brokers   917 1,135  

Westland Insurance Group Ltd 1,089 1,618    

Afﬁnity Insurance Services 1,072 2,372    

Pemberton Insurance Corporation 1,064 1,855    

Hicks Paciﬁc Centre Insurance Service Ltd 1,123 1,848    

BCAA 1,089 1,620    

Thompson Insurance Centre (1997) Inc 1,082 1,807    

Average 1,087 1,853 917 1,131 1,167 1,451

Sources

1. Manitoba Public Insurance (MPI) quotes where obtained from the MPI website.

2. Saskatchewan Government Insurance “(SGI) Basic Plate” quotes for Saskatchewan were obtained from the SGI website; The “SGI Autopak” quotes were obtained from the individual brokers listed in the table.

3. The ICBC Basic Autoplan and Optional Autoplan where both obtained from each individual broker listed.

Note

All quotes exclude the respective registration costs and any applicable taxes in each province.

A Comparison of Automobile Insurance Regimes in Canada

TABLE A4d Insurance Price Quotes for Public Provinces: Poor Record

COMPANY

BRITISH COLUMBIA, VANCOUVER SASKATCHEWAN, SASKATOON MANITOBA, WINNIPEG

Basic Coverage Complete Coverage Basic Coverage Complete Coverage Basic Coverage Complete Coverage

ICBC Basic

Autoplan

ICBC Optional

Autoplan SGI Basic Plate SGI Autopak MPI Basic Autopac MPI Optional Autopac

Manitoba Public Insurance     1,239 1,541

Saskatchewan Government Insurance   978   

Afﬁnity Insurance Services Inc Lakewood   978 1,236  

Afﬁnity Insurance Services Inc Preston Ave.   978 1,253  

Life Line General Insurance Inc   978 1,207  

Hoffmann Kool Insurance   978 1,226  

Galon Insurance Brokers   978 1,226  

Westland Insurance Group Ltd 1,594 1,743    

Afﬁnity Insurance Services 1,618 1,743    

Pemberton Insurance Corporation 1,514 2,640    

Hicks Paciﬁc Centre Insurance Service Ltd 1,573 2,610    

BCAA 1,594 2,556    

Thompson Insurance Centre (1997) Inc 1,533 2,569    

Averages 1,571 2,310 978 1,230 1,239 1,541

Sources

See Table A4c.

Note

All quotes exclude the respective registration costs and any applicable taxes in each province.

96 Assurances et gestion des risques/Insurance and risk management Vol. 86 (1-2)

TABLE A5 Sources for Tables 2 and 3 in text and Graph 2

Sources Tables 2 and 3:

• 2015 GISA Automobile Exhibit Introduction, accessed at: https://www.gisa.ca/StatisticalInformation; 2015 GISA

Actual Loss Ratio Exhibits, accessed at: https://www.gisa.ca/StatisticalInformation;

• 2009 to 2015 ICBC Annual Service Plan Reports, accessed at: http://www.icbc.com/about-icbc/company-info/

Pages/Annual-Report.aspx; 2008 ICBC Annual Service Plan Report, accessed at: http://www.ﬁn.gov.bc.ca/ocg/

pa/08_09/Sup%20E/pdf/ICBC_Fin_Stmts.pdf;

• ICBC Consolidated Financial Statements As At December 31, 2007, accessed at: http://www.ﬁn.gov.bc.ca/ocg/

pa/07_08/Sup%20E/pdf/ICBC_Fin_Stmts.pdf; ICBC Consolidated Financial Statements As At December 31,

2006, accessed at: http://www.ﬁn.gov.bc.ca/ocg/pa/06_07/Sup%20E/pdf/ICBC_Fin_Stmts.pdf;

• 2007 to 2015-16 Saskatchewan Auto fund Annual Reports, accessed at: https://www.sgi.sk.ca/about/

publications/index.html; 2007/2006 to 2016/15 MPI Annual Reports, accessed at: https://www.mpi.mb.ca/en/

Newsroom/Pages/annualreports.aspx;

• 2012/11 to 2016/15 MPI Annual Financial Statements, accessed at: https://www.mpi.mb.ca/en/Newsroom/

Pages/annualreports.aspx.

Sources Graph 2:

• 2010 to 2016 Ontario Road Safety Annual Report, accessed at: http://www.ontario.ca/orsar;

• 2002 to 2014 Alberta Collision Statistics, accessed at: http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/3119.htm;

• 2017 ICBC Quick Statistics for the Media, accessed at: http://www.icbc.com/about-icbc/newsroom/Pages/

Statistics.aspx; 2011 to 2016 ICBC Quick Statistics for the Media, accessed at: http://www.integritybc.ca/

?page_id=6149;

• 2002 to 2007 ICBC Trafﬁc Collision Statistics: Police-attended Injury and Fatal Collisions, accessed at:

http://www.integritybc.ca/?page_id=6157;

• SAAQ Bilan 2015 - Accidents, parc automobile, permis de conduire, accessed at: https://saaq.gouv.qc.ca/

ﬁleadmin/documents/publications/espace-recherche/dossier-statistique-bilan-2015.pdf;

• SAAQ Bilan 2016 - Accidents, parc automobile, permis de conduire, personal communication with E. Turmel

(May19, 2017); 2012 to 2015 MPI Trafﬁc Collision Statistics Report, accessed at: https://www.mpi.mb.ca/en/

Rd- Safety/Overview/Pages/TrafﬁcCollisionStatisticsReport.aspx;

• 2012 to 2015 SGI TAIS Annual Report, accessed at: https://www.sgi.sk.ca/about/publications/collisionstats/

index.html; 1999 to 2015: Statistics Canada, CANSIM Table 405-0004, Total Road Motor Vehicles.