Yeah i already switched to geico as of this week. I suspect that they might try and raise the price next year but if they do I'll just switch again.
Geico is more evil than most insurance companies because they are on record as donating tons of radar guns and other speed enforcement/revenue generating devices to police departments. Not
much more evil, but still.
Like again, I am not arguing I don't deserve a surcharge. Only that even though I had the shit luck to hit an expensive car, the actual accident was in fact very much a "it could happen to pretty much anyone" sort of deal. The fact that the charge jumped so much specifically due to the repair costs of the car means it wasn't about safety, only money.
Ummmm, that's exactly the point of liability insurance and how your policy price is calculated, though it varies by company and how they run their actuarial tables. Generally, if you hit a derelict Toyota Echo, your rate hike will be relatively minimal. If you hit something like, oh, a certain CL550 that's in my family, your rate hike is going to be substantial.
NONE of this is about safety, kat. Insurance premiums are calculated based on the financial exposure and risk of the insurance company issuing the policy. If you are unlikely to force them to pay money, you will (generally) have to pay less for coverage. The more likely you are to make them pay money, and the more money you are likely to make them pay out, the more you will have to pay to obtain coverage. It has no direct relationship to safety, other than potentially making you want to be as safe as possible to keep your rates low.
Especially since I HAVE had 2 accidents when MY CAR was the one that was stationary, but they automatically gave me fault on both cases. My car skidding in the rain is at fault, but a guy hydroplaning into mine going 40 in a 25 is my fault too. So is a guy clipping my car trying to illegally pass another car.
Unless you live in a no-fault state, either something weird was going on or you were illegally or improperly stopped when hit - or had a malfunction that contributed to the crash (no rear lights at night, etc) - if you were found at legal fault. It should also be noted that you DO NOT have to be at fault in an accident to have your rates go up. Insurance companies will sometimes raise your rates if you are unlucky and get hit, even though they didn't have to pay out any money in the event, because they consider you unlucky and therefore have raised your chances of being the cause of them having to pay out in future. You may not be legally at fault, but still have to pay more anyway. This is absolutely true in no-fault states.
If it was a fair thing to do, I wouldn't be able to switch companies and get a $1500-2000 discount on it. So clearly it wasn't. I won't pretend I am the most responsible driver but I adhere pretty heavily to making sure I always have time and space to be able to safely stop. I have been frequently beeped at even in the fiat for refusing to take left hand turns I know I could technically make because better safe then sorry so the idea i was being charged that for safety reasons is kind of insulting.
Different insurance companies factor risk and price policies differently. Right now, I pay about $200 a year to cover both my motorcycles with Company A. With the same exact bikes, driving record, residence and everything else, company B quoted me $2100 for the same coverage because their actuaries believe that my 919 is a high risk motorcycle from their company history. Company C quoted me $750 per year for the same coverage because my 700 is a vintage bike and they believe they will have to pay more to repair/replace it should something happen - they don't care about the 919. Company D refuses to cover anyone with a 919 at any price, Company E will give me a good rate on the 919 but won't insure any pre-1999 bike and so on.
Back when I had my F-350, about half the insurance companies I approached refused to insure it (or any older one ton truck) as a personal vehicle due to how many ridiculously expensive claims they'd had to pay out. Apparently there are a large number of dishonest people insuring them as personal vehicles then using them for contracting business - and running them through houses, dumping them in pools, driving them onto and collapsing wooden walkway bridges, all the sort of "Bad Contractor" things. Other companies had not had the same experience of mass payouts, so they were happy to insure it (albeit at different rates).
Safety has nothing to do with the price of your insurance - only the payout risk you represent has anything to do with the price.