Yesterday, I commented on the California Farm Bureau’s publicizing the perils of doing away with territorial rating — specifically that folks in low-cost areas will end up paying more, and folks in high cost areas paying less.
In their press release, they cited a study on the potential impacts. Unfortunately, I still haven’t found a copy of that paper, but I did find CFBF’s summary of it on their website.
According to CFBF, folks in most of CA would see rate hikes, while Orange, Fresno, Stanislaus, Sacramento, Los Angeles, and San Francisco would generally see rate decreases.
Now I really want to see that study. Not only are the rate swings a bit less than I would have expected (as presented, the impacts don’t actually look that unreasonable), that winners/losers list of counties doesn’t sound quite right to me.
For example, one would expect the conclusions presented on CFBF’s site to imply that auto insurance in Stanislaus County is higher than in much of the Bay Area, or in San Diego County. And, while I’m no expert on California auto insurance rates…that result doesn’t smell quite right to me.