ok question is full coverage genreally a lot more than not full coverage.

also how come when uninsured drivers hit others, they suffer nothing but the victim (me) loses money out of my pocket? all state told me that if the driver who crashed me (he has no insurance btw) does not have money, even if I sue I will be able to get nothing. SHould I take this to small claims court.

Is it just me or does it seem kind of retarded that the person commitiing the "crime" is not doin the "time" Why dont we all not buy insurance and go crash others for fun, makes no sense to me. Yes i do not know anything about insurance so please be patient with me for this is my FIRST big big accident, the whole rear of my car is broken.

 

Sure...if you don't have much personal asset, in theory you can drive w/o insurance. The other party will sue you for nothing. You can file for bankruptcy as well. You will be cited for driving w/o insurance or have your license revoked.

You can always choose to buy uninsured coverage. You can also decide to pay the deductible and have your own insurance company cover the repair or medical cost. You have a valid complaint, but you can cover your own butt with the right sets of insurance coverages.

By the way, a traffic accident or at fault accident is hardly classified as a "crime." I am sorry about your car though. I hope it gets taken care of.

 

Driving w/o liability is illegal....so that could be a crime I guess.

 

Welcome back, 232323, formerly known as frankf0k168 and Gambit87.

 

LOL pwned?

 

In New York State, the law requires insurance companies to notify the DMV of any lapses in your coverage. You get a letter fining you $8 a day for all the time you don't have coverage, and after 30 days you have to surrender your plates. Failure to comply results in suspension of your drivers license.

Since there's always these types out there driving around without insurance, adding uninsured motorist insurance to your policy is a must.
.
.
.

 

The whole liability insurance thing is more srewed up than you think. My Dad (an attorney) tells stories of his early career years (50's) where he and a deputy would go and take posession of cars whose drivers had caused wrecks. There was a law (that STILL exists here in SC) that automatically puts a lien for the damages on the auto at fault (this lien supercedes a bank lien, btw). Other driver can't pay? Taking his car was the solution. Liability insurance, like the first post said, is essentially worthless unless you have some value to yourself. It's not the fender-benders that are of concern, but bodily injury. The $15K minimum covers three days in the hispital. And after that you have little recourse but to sue, assuming there is something to sue over.

As for me, I carry rather high coverages as well as underinsured/noninsured motorist coverage. No, it's not fair that I have to pay to protect me and my family from other, irresponsible people but that's just the way it is.

All that being said, sorry about your car and hope it all gets fixed to your satisfaction with as little headache as possible.

 

Liability just covers damage you inflict on others. Comprehensive covers glass, fire and theft, Collision covers damage to your car if it's your fault. All three = full coverage (includes uninsured/underinsured coverage) and yes full coverage costs more since it's more coverage.

If an uninsured motorists hits you and you have uninsured motorist coverage, you make a claim against that coverage.

 

You can take them to small claims court, but in all likelihood, if they're not carrying insurance on their vehicle, they don't have much in terms of assets. So even if you get a judgment, the chances of you collecting are slim.

You have uninsured motorist benefits to cover you in circumstances like this. Otherwise, you'd be fronting the entire bill out of pocket. You're right, it stinks that it comes out of your policy, but it's better than it coming out of your pocket. But i guess they'll get you back by raising your premiums. Either way it stinks. sorry to hear about all this.

 

As I recall this original poster had low Uninsured coverages. Something like $3,500 or so. Not certain how/why that works but based on the prior thread, she thinks she will only get $3,500 total (or possibly thinks that she owes $3,500 in some type of deductable). IMHO, she may have gotten too slim a policy for her car but in reality what she now needs to do is to work this out with her insurance company to better understand EXACTLY what they WILL pay for and what SHE/HE has to pay for. As far as uninsured drivers goes here's how I would treat it... Appearing before the judge in court I would say...OK, he's not covered but this court agrees that he owes me compensation, right? I'll accept partial payment of that compensation in labor (although everyone assumes they are due cash, that is not the case). As far as labor goes, I would find some yard work (like putting in a retaining wall or 20 years of lawn mowing service or the like). Of course, I would have a clause in the labor contract that would release them from such service obligations upon payment of the original penalty (plus interest). She/He can't pay? Hmmm, there's ALWAYS a solution (of course there's also always garnishment of wages as well)

 

FWIW - Some people are what they would consider "judgement proof."

That is... There's nothing "criminal" per se about having an accident, so it becomes a civil case where one party basically sues the other party... But since one guy has nothing, he is considered judgement proof.

You can't squeeze blood out of a turnip!

IME - insurance is a great big PONZI SCHEME... I detest insurance with a passion, probably because I pay so much and have never made a claim.

Even though I hate insurance, think it's a scam and have never had an accident... I carry as much insurance as I can get whether I can afford it or not is the secondary question.

Why?

Because I am not judgement proof.

The world is filled with schmucks (lazy ones who sue) and I 100% refuse to work my life away for one of them schmucks. So I carry $1MM minimum coverage, most nimrods will settle for enough crack to get them through next week, but there's many more out there who just know how to work the system.

 

Here is Wisconsin, we can file a report with the DMV on the uninsured/underinsured motors for claims that can or will not pay for an accident they caused. The DMV will notify the at-fault party and require them to pay the damage to the claimant by a such and such date. If the at fault party does not pay, the DMV will suspend or revoke the person's license.

That would be something to look into for your state.

 

Very good post. All of your points are quite valid. Really, to me, what it comes down to is this: if you can afford to drive a ~$35k vehicle, then you should also be able to afford full coverage on your vehicle. (It's like the people who put 87 octane in their car because they can't/won't pay the extra 20 cents a gallon. If you can't afford the extra 20 cents a gallon, then you probably shouldn't be driving a TL in the first place). What gets me are these people who CHOOSE to not carry full (collision + liability + comprehensive) insurance and THEN complain and bitch and wonder why the insurance company won't pay for the repairs when they are in an accident that isn't their fault. If you can't live with the possibility of an uninsured driver totalling your TL, get full insurance. Otherwise, if you don't have full insurnace, you have no one to blame but yourself. It sucks and it's not fair, but no one said life is fair.

 

So now all you have to do is convince the folks that can't afford "any" insurance that they don't need a car,,,, period! --- because life just isn't fair....

If I was king for a day "anyone" getting stopped, no matter what the violation, would automatically and swiftly have their vehicle impounded if they did not have insurance. A hefty fine would also be applied that if not paid in full within a reasonable amount of time the car would be sold. If the vehicle was driven by someone other than the owner (and the driver was uninsured) the owner best have insurance or suffer said loss. If vehicle/driver was the cause of an accident then all damages resulting from the accident would also have to be paid as well as the fine before the car returned to the owner. Now, if the driver didn't have a valid drivers licence or registration, they too would be "impounded".


True, life isn't always fair. But what really sucks is the fact that bureaucracy causes the law abiding folks to get screwed while the guilty walk away smiling.. The cost of insurance is directly related to the amount of fraudulent scams, UNinsured motorists, thieves, and the over arching problem that most get off without paying a cent. If every state had a law like I described above we would all pay 50% less for car insurance.

People do the things they do and act the way they act because our country has gotten completely lax and/or bogged down in red tape that no one is held accountable. Sure you can't squeeze blood out of a turnip... But if they actually knew they would loose what little monetary or personal freedoms they did have it would sure be a deterrent.

It's not the fact that this "unfair stuff" happens that pisses folks off,, it's the fact that our towns, cities, states, and country actions/laws tend to condone it.

If you wonder why I am so disgusted with this uninsured etc subject, its due to either being involved in or helping a coworker through it. Overall, 6 times in the last 7 years!! And yes, its on my mind every time I pay my hideous premiums (though MUCH less than others), and the wife and I haven't had a claim for over 14+ years.
We all pay more so others don't have to pay at all.

 

Its stupid to drive without insurance. OP seems bitter without being rational.

 

You see that's the problem, people don't understand the basic concept of insurance (auto or otherwise). It's not a bank account that you pay into and someday you hope to draw from.

In it's simplest terms, Insurance is a wager. You're betting that you may have a claim in the next 6 months (that will be greater than your premium), your insurance company is betting that you won't. Your wager is the insurance premium. During that time the most you will be out is the premium, regardless if you have one or two accidents. Your insurance company on the other hand keeps your premium if you don't have an accident, but if you do, they usually pay out a lot more than what the premium is. That's why people usually don't self insure. The insurance company offsets that risk because you're in a pool with other drivers. The type of risk you are (type of driver, vehicle, and where you live) is reflected in the premium you pay.

People feel like they don't get anything out of insurance if they don't have a claim, but in fact they do. In a sense you're buying peace of mind that financially you won't be ruined if you have a major accident for which you are at fault, as I said, at most you'll be out your premium (assuming you purchased the proper coverage).

Think about it, what are your two biggest financial assets? You're home and your car. If you are at fault in a car accident and you hurt someone, your insurance protects you from having a lein put on your house or having your wages garnished.

If you purchased uninsured/under insured coverage and you get hit by an uninsured driver, once your company pays, you can be certain that they're going to go after that driver to get compensated. It's called subrogation.

Again, remember insurance is a business, not a charity. They are in it to make money, and insurance is highly regulated. Everytime insurance companies want to raise rates across the board, they almost always have to go to the state insurance regulatory commission to get approval. Actually they have to do the same thing if they want to offer discounts. That's how regulated it is.

Now if an insurance company has poor claim practices, that's another story, but for sake of this thread, I'm just explaining the concept. It's not a scheme, but a transaction. You're purchasing financial protection for a given period of time.

 

Lets hear some of your rationality...?

 

While there are not enough details to fully understand what is making him upset, the idea seems to be that there is no justice to be obtained by pursuing an uninsured motorist. In the other thread he started I asked if his state required motorists to have insurance. If the state did not then there does not seem to be a criminal remedy, which the OP wants to dearly.

As for the civil remedy, I'd take some personal satisfaction in knowing that if I did sue on a valid injury and had recognizable damage and won, I could enforce the judgment against the uninsured motorist and ruin the rest of their life.

As for the rationality of having insurance - it almost seems self evident. You are insuring yourself against possible judgments against you due to your possible negligence in an accident. Your policy establishes a cushion for you to rely on in the unfortunate event you do have a judgment entered against you. Additionally, if you are hit by an uninsured motorist, if your policy so covers, you are taken care of.

 

Rationality for insurance yes - couldn't agree more. I just wish the laws were tougher on those that choose not to have it. Driving a vehicle in America is a privilege with huge responsibilities. Having insurance to pay for damages you may inflict on yourself and others is a major part of that responsibility. Without it you have no right to be behind the wheel.
I would be pretty ticked at myself if I realized my policy was not adequate to cover the damages caused by an uninsured motorist. I would be extremely pissed that the "faultee" individual didn't have any in the first place and I would definitely want he/she held accountable.

Cheers

 

There's a difference between "judgement proof" and a typical case. You really do not need that 1million dollar umbrella unless you've got over $500,000 in assets. Unfortunately, half a million really doesn't buy you much anymore so it seems that more and more are carrying the 1millon dollar policies in an effort to appease the "potential" threats. The idea is that if they can get a million out of you, then maybe that will be enough but the reality is that they could "see" your million in coverage, figure you have more and sue you for 3 million. In truth, the one million dollar coverage is simply a small (cheap - It was only like another $100 on my policy) bet that it will be enough if the time ever comes.

 

I agree with having more of a consequence, but I don't see it being implemented. Monetary sanctions seem like the most obvious and in line with other evils only because of statute.

 

But I take what the max is they'll give me, $1MM is most common... Sure I could pay more but when I out-insure the majority there's no need. For the most part I try not to put myself into positions where $1MM of coverage is needed. I'm more worried about the piddly chit where someone cries whiplash after they backed into me.

 

It's like that in Maryland too, but I think it is $150 for the first 1-30 days, and then $7 a day thereafter! Not worth it!

 

I'm an insurance agent so bash at will

Heres what all the coverages are though:

BIPD (Liability) - Bodily Injury Property Damage
This is the required coverage by state law. Many states have a minimum of 15/30/10 split limit liability. There is at least one state that requires 25/50/25. You can also have a CSL or Combined Single Limit where all damages cap at a certain amount but arent limited on a damage type basis.

Example: 100/300/100 split limit

A. First number of 100 covers $100,000 of Bodily injury per person per accident for other parties.
B. Second number of 300 means that $300,000 of maximum payout per accident in bodily injury
C. Third number of 100 means $100,000 in property damage. This covers the vehicle of other parties, or any other property that might be damaged such as walls, fences, light posts, houses etc.

UM/UIM - Uninsured and Underinsured Motorist
Normally these coverages need to be written equal to BIPD amounts. But you can sign a doc and either have it completely removed or reduced lower. However given the previous example:
UM/UIM : 100/300

A. UM - Covers $100,000 per person and $300,000 per accident for occupants of your vehicle on bodily injury in the event that the other motorist is at fault and no insurance.
B. UIM - Same as UM except covers other at fault motorists that have low limits of liability. Say for instance they have state minimum 15/30/10 liability and hit you. Your hand is broken and you are unable to type for 1 year. You are entitled to loss of wages and medical costs under this coverage.

NOTE: UM/UIM never covers property damage to your vehicle.

Comp or Comprehensive coverage - Covers damage to your vehicle. Generally involving incidents where you the driver are not-at-fault. Examples of comp losses - Theft, hit and run, uninsured or underinsured, not at fault accidents, vandalism, flood, tree falling on car etc..

Collision - Covers your vehicle in the event that you are involved in an accident that is your fault. Generally single car accidents like rolling the vehicle are always considered at-fault.

Other Optional coverages:

Rental - Pays X amount per day for you to rent a car when you do not have use of your vehicle due to a 'covered loss'

Towing / roadside assistance - Covers up to x amount per incident. Can make this claim for something as trivial as running out of gas up to total loss of vehicle. Just because its easy to make this claim, use it wisely. You have 4 of these in a year, some companies will drop you.

Glass Waiver of Deductible - Though it might seem pretty self explanatory, this coverage really only waives the amount of your deductible in the case that a window in your car needs to be fully replaced. You dont nessicarily need this coverage to cover glass chips or the windshield. Say your deductible is only $100, the windshield would be replaced under Comprehensive and you would owe $100. Glass coverage really comes in handy when you have a high deductible of $1000 or more.

GAP - This one is also tricky. Make sure you read what you policy says on this. Progressive for example, their GAP coverage is 25% higher than wholesale blue book. Meaning they will pay you wholesale blue book for your car and if you have gap they add on 25%. If you have a decent GAP coverage it should cover the difference between the value of your car and the amount of your financing.

__________

With that said, if you are involved in an accident where the other driver is at fault and has little or no insurance. You file the claim with your own insurance company. If you were not injured, UM/UIM will not come in to play. It will be considered a Comprehensive loss or not-at=fault accident. The insurance company will fix or pay an amount for your vehicle for the claim and subtract your deductible from that amount and pay the remaining amount to you. If the other party has insurance, they will attempt to "subrogate" or recover the claimed amount from the other insurance carrier or from the other driver. They may also attempt to recover your deductible amount from the insurance company for you, they generally do not try to get the deductible from the other person because its not worth the time to litigate.

You always have the option of suing the private party for damages if they exceed the amount your insurance will cover or to recover your deductible. Once you have a judgement against another person, you can persue to garnish wages to recover this amount. So they dont have to be in possesion of actual assets or money, they just need to have a wage.

 

Good point, I think maybe he's either mad that he has liability only and the Insurance company isnt going to cover his damages or he's angry about the deductible.

In any case, its never fun to be in an accident or lose the use of your own vehicle. Especially TL owners like us. I had mine in for a repair that took close to a week and they gave me a $25/day rental car, certainly no where near the car my TL is! Generally rentals are going to be much worse than what we have so its definately a bummer. Not to mention if you were hurt and have to go to therapy or treatments of any kind.

The best rule when buying insurance: Cover yourself first. No matter what happens to me, i will be out at most $500 for my deductible. My car, the occupants and myself are all covered no matter what happens or who hits me.

 

IMHO, anyone driving a late model car especially if its >$20K should have full comprehensive insurance. Sure it's more expensive but it's sure worth it when something like this happens. When I was in high college I used to drive a 92 Ford probe GT. It was a good car but I only got liability coverage because I paid only $4K for it used.

 

I don't have insurance on my tl right now cause the winter snow!!haha, So I parked the tl in the garage and no insurance during the winter days, so i'm just driving my mazda mpv 96 hahahaha, nice little beater huh? haha
~Jason

 

can someone explain what gap is? i have 100/300/100 and comp - 100 and coll - 300, is gap something i shuld look into?

 

Basic GAP insurance covers you in the event your car gets totaled etc. and you owe more than what the car is worth. For example: Say you finance the entire $35K for 5+ years for your TL yet it gets totaled 2 years later. Due to depreciation your insurance only pays you $26K for your totaled TL yet your loan payoff is $31K. Your GAP insurance policy would pay the $5K difference etc..

This way you don't end up without a car but still have a left over loan payment..... I would recommend GAP insurance anytime someone finances the entire amount for a vehicle - and the loan duration exceeds 3 years. Bottom line, if you are not lowering your principle payoff on your loan at the same rate or greater than the vehicles depreciation, get GAP insurance. Most policies are relatively cheep. Just ensure they are also refundable/prorated if you sell the car or terminate/payoff your loan early.


Cheers

 

ohh ok thanks, i see what you mean, cars paid off so no point there lol maybe for the next one

 

Sorry to hijack, but this is for spool or anyone that knows. I'm in Arizona by the way, if that matters.


Are they any cases where your premiums won't go up if you make a claim? Example: my sister's car got hit in a parking lot a while ago and the driver gave her false information. While our adjuster said there wouldn't be any increase in premiums (although they don't always necessarily correspond with our agent).
However, many people told us a regardless of what the adjuster says, if we make a claim and there isn't another insurance company/policy to go after, then her premiums would go up even if it wasn't her fault.


Thanks in advance....I'm just curious, I think we ended up paying out of pocket, it was pretty minor damage.

 

Sucks that your sister got lied to. It depends on your insurance. I've got the Allstate Platinum or Premium or whatever with accident forgiveness. It guarantees that the premium won't go up because of your first accident claim. If you make a second claim, all bets are off.

Just something else to consider when shopping around for insurnace. That "bargain" insurance won't be such a bargain if your premium quadruples after you make a claim. That's why a lot of people don't file claims - which seems silly to me. Why pay for all that insurance and then never use it? I've made 2 comprehensive claims against my insurance in the past 3 years and my premiums did not go up (in fact they went down). Allstate isn't the cheapest insurance but conventional wisdom applies to all insurance: you get what you pay for.