SUV the Safest

[Deanh]

I don't agree with states mandating liability insurance. But, if I buy a car and have a loan on it, shouldn't the bank require its collateral be protected? Sorry if you were being facetious (the sarcasm font doesn't always work on these boards), but it sure sounded typical "insurance companies are big, evil and certainly will fuck you over, guaranteed".

 

And of course you play a role in society (or your employer does). If it doesn't then why does the "Uggh, I wish I could buy a car over the internet directly from a manufacturer, the stealership will screw you, no matter what" argument come up every once in a while? (Not necessarily here).

no biggie...I must admit though I get tired of handing over insurance checks....hell, my Homeowners just went up $100 a month ON A 30 YEAR NOTE no less...why?....increased costs apparently. My car...same thing, went from Cooper S to the Fiesta...premiums went up?.....why?.....ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm......sad thing is when its mandated the Agencies can write theri own prices...and you can bet as soon as the loan is over I'm going mini...ba$teedos! Also, half of the ever increasing costs of vehicles can be placed at the ever increasing demands of agencies such as the IIHS....so the cars are now a hell of a lot safer, but ironically MORE expensive to insure.....why....are they more expensive to repair?....all I an say is ARRRRRRG! I go with the flow, not particularly happy with it, and I curse non insured motorists that also have a hand in increaed premiums...unfortunately because of LAWSUITS Insurance is necessary...its a no win...35 years of driving...NO accidents, 1 claim ( palm leave dented my hood )

[Deanh]

Why not? If someone hits you (or hits your house or business) and causes damage - don't you want them to pay for it? Otherwise your insurance has to pay for it. When uninsured drivers cause damage it raises the insurance rates for all of us who do have insurance. I say everybody should pay their fair share and the only way to ensure that is to make liability mandatory.

 

And yes - lienholders require full coverage, usually with a minimal deductible to protect their investment.

California....you need proof of liability to renew registration......

[BrewfanGRB]

Why not? If someone hits you (or hits your house or business) and causes damage - don't you want them to pay for it? Otherwise your insurance has to pay for it. When uninsured drivers cause damage it raises the insurance rates for all of us who do have insurance. I say everybody should pay their fair share and the only way to ensure that is to make liability mandatory.

 

Of course, I want "them" to pay. But if they have insurance, "they" aren't paying anyway. If they don't have insurance, I'll be happy to bankrupt them. If someone is too stupid to not have insurance without the state telling them to do it, then I couldn't care less if they are bankrupted for life. I carry very high uninsured motorist limits on my auto AND my umbrella policy.

 

As for the mandatory part, consider this: Prior to a couple years ago, Wisconsin was only 1 of 2 (I think 2 total) states that didn't have a mandatory insurance law. (It had a financial responsibility law, so if you were liable in a crash and couldn't pay for it, your license was suspended). At that time, Wisconsin still had rates of uninsured motorists that was among the lowest in the nation. The point is: Speed limits are "mandatory", but they aren't followed to the letter. If a person can't afford insurance or is just opposed to buying it, nothing short of throwing them in jail will make them buy it.

 

Then you have totalitarian states like NY, where if you are pulled over without insurance, you can be arrested. (I've had clients call us FROM JAIL because their policy was out of force and they were pulled over). That's just so obnoxious, I don't even know where to start. I have a huge list of states that I would refuse to live in merely because those laws are just not even worth dealing with--NY is at the top.

[Deanh]

Of course, I want "them" to pay. But if they have insurance, "they" aren't paying anyway. If they don't have insurance, I'll be happy to bankrupt them. If someone is too stupid to not have insurance without the state telling them to do it, then I couldn't care less if they are bankrupted for life. I carry very high uninsured motorist limits on my auto AND my umbrella policy.

 

As for the mandatory part, consider this: Prior to a couple years ago, Wisconsin was only 1 of 2 (I think 2 total) states that didn't have a mandatory insurance law. (It had a financial responsibility law, so if you were liable in a crash and couldn't pay for it, your license was suspended). At that time, Wisconsin still had rates of uninsured motorists that was among the lowest in the nation. The point is: Speed limits are "mandatory", but they aren't followed to the letter. If a person can't afford insurance or is just opposed to buying it, nothing short of throwing them in jail will make them buy it.

 

Then you have totalitarian states like NY, where if you are pulled over without insurance, you can be arrested. (I've had clients call us FROM JAIL because their policy was out of force and they were pulled over). That's just so obnoxious, I don't even know where to start. I have a huge list of states that I would refuse to live in merely because those laws are just not even worth dealing with--NY is at the top.

I wouldnt live in NY regardless.....lol

[akirby]

Of course, I want "them" to pay. But if they have insurance, "they" aren't paying anyway.

 

Yes they are. They're paying insurance premiums into the pool and the payment comes out of that pool. Just like it does for you if you cause an accident.

 

 

If they don't have insurance, I'll be happy to bankrupt them. If someone is too stupid to not have insurance without the state telling them to do it, then I couldn't care less if they are bankrupted for life. I carry very high uninsured motorist limits on my auto AND my umbrella policy.

 

If they don't have insurance then the people who DO have insurance are paying higher premiums to cover the idiots who don't. If everyone had liability then you wouldn't even need uninsured motorists coverage. Most people who don't carry liability don't have any assets anyway so what do they care if you put them in bankruptcy or not? Meanwhile YOUR insurance has to cover the loss and that's the rub. The cost for the idiots who don't have liability are borne by those of us who are responsible and who do carry insurance.

 

Forcing all drivers to carry liability will lower the cost for those of us who carry it now.

 

I'm not saying the laws that require it are necessarily effective and there may be better ways to do it but I don't see how you can suggest it's not a good idea to try.

[BrewfanGRB]

Yes they are. They're paying insurance premiums into the pool and the payment comes out of that pool. Just like it does for you if you cause an accident.

 

I understand the mechanism, of course. This is all I've every done since I came out of college.

 

Forcing all drivers to carry liability will lower the cost for those of us who carry it now.

 

True...if you could effectively "force" this to occur. You can't achieve 100% compliance. But you still have all the ancillary costs and everything else with enforcement.

 

I'm not saying the laws that require it are necessarily effective and there may be better ways to do it but I don't see how you can suggest it's not a good idea to try.

 

Because prior to WI having a mandatory insurance law, it already had very high levels of insured motorists. Passing the law that was passed didn't have a lot of "teeth" (you're only required to provide proof of insurance when requested by law enforcement or at the time of an accident).

 

Using my example of the overboard NY process, you think that's cheap? Even if the system is self-supporting through fees, fines, taxes, etc...who pays that? Insurers, consumers (cheaters), more or less everyone. And NY still doesn't have 100% compliance anyway....despite throwing people in jail for it.

[akirby]

I understand the mechanism, of course. This is all I've every done since I came out of college.

 

 

 

True...if you could effectively "force" this to occur. You can't achieve 100% compliance. But you still have all the ancillary costs and everything else with enforcement.

 

 

 

Because prior to WI having a mandatory insurance law, it already had very high levels of insured motorists. Passing the law that was passed didn't have a lot of "teeth" (you're only required to provide proof of insurance when requested by law enforcement or at the time of an accident).

 

Using my example of the overboard NY process, you think that's cheap? Even if the system is self-supporting through fees, fines, taxes, etc...who pays that? Insurers, consumers (cheaters), more or less everyone. And NY still doesn't have 100% compliance anyway....despite throwing people in jail for it.

 

In GA it's all computerized. If you drop your insurance it gets reported to DMV. I don't remember the remediation but it is proactive to some extent.

 

I understand in some circumstances the implementation is not effective. I thought you were arguing against the idea but not I get it.

[Noah Harbinger]

Of course, I want "them" to pay. But if they have insurance, "they" aren't paying anyway. If they don't have insurance, I'll be happy to bankrupt them. If someone is too stupid to not have insurance without the state telling them to do it, then I couldn't care less if they are bankrupted for life.

 

They wouldn't be bankrupted for life, they'd declare bankruptcy and start over. All while you're suffering unnecessary pain and your bones are healing crookedly, declaring bankruptcy yourself because you can't afford your medical bills.

 

What a glorios glorious free market for all involved!

[akirby]

They wouldn't be bankrupted for life, they'd declare bankruptcy and start over. All while you're suffering unnecessary pain and your bones are healing crookedly, declaring bankruptcy yourself because you can't afford your medical bills.

 

Not exactly - that's why he has uninsured motorist coverage. But I would add that the ones who don't have coverage generally don't have cash or assets anyway so why do they care if they have to declare bankruptcy and walk away?

 

Not much different than health insurance - the people that don't pay premiums still get sick and receive care - they're just not paying their portion.

[BrewfanGRB]

They wouldn't be bankrupted for life, they'd declare bankruptcy and start over. All while you're suffering unnecessary pain and your bones are healing crookedly, declaring bankruptcy yourself because you can't afford your medical bills.

 

What a glorios glorious free market for all involved!

 

Not quite. In most states (to my understanding), but certainly in WI, you can't discharge a civil judgment through bankruptcy. That's why anyone without insurance would be truly "bankrupted" as either they would sell all personal assets and if they do work, their wages garnished to satisfy the judgment or they would not work (to avoid having to pay the judgment) and they'd be poor for the rest of their life.

 

My point is: Would it be glorious and wonderful if everyone carried insurance voluntarily (so there'd be little additional cost for administration) and they carried sufficiently high limits? Absolutely. But even with mandatory insurance laws, too many still don't. So I carry very high limits of uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage and if someone messes up, I tell State Farm "pay me and you deal with the problems". In THIS particular issue, I'm selfish. I don't care where the money comes from as long as: a) my medical costs are covered, B) any costs necessary for my ongoing care, rehab or housing modifications are covered and c) I receive a reasonable sum to compensate me for any pain and suffering.

 

Side note: In most of the truly burdensome states, reporting is electronic. But insurance companies all make mistakes--human or computer. I'm not thrilled with the idea of ending up in jail or my car impounded because 1 person somewhere made an honest mistake. Trust me--I deal with it everyday: No one in the NY, NJ, MD, GA, MA or FL DMV (these are all completely mind-blowingly difficult states) cares in any way, shape or form about the "right thing". They have a rule and they follow it. Someone screws up (even honestly), your car is impounded and it's up to you to fix it. Not for me, thanks. Strangely, given CA's bad rap as a liberal state, they have electronic reporting but they are pretty cool about it. Minor fine and easy to fix.

[Deanh]

Not quite. In most states (to my understanding), but certainly in WI, you can't discharge a civil judgment through bankruptcy. That's why anyone without insurance would be truly "bankrupted" as either they would sell all personal assets and if they do work, their wages garnished to satisfy the judgment or they would not work (to avoid having to pay the judgment) and they'd be poor for the rest of their life.

 

My point is: Would it be glorious and wonderful if everyone carried insurance voluntarily (so there'd be little additional cost for administration) and they carried sufficiently high limits? Absolutely. But even with mandatory insurance laws, too many still don't. So I carry very high limits of uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage and if someone messes up, I tell State Farm "pay me and you deal with the problems". In THIS particular issue, I'm selfish. I don't care where the money comes from as long as: a) my medical costs are covered, B) any costs necessary for my ongoing care, rehab or housing modifications are covered and c) I receive a reasonable sum to compensate me for any pain and suffering.

 

Side note: In most of the truly burdensome states, reporting is electronic. But insurance companies all make mistakes--human or computer. I'm not thrilled with the idea of ending up in jail or my car impounded because 1 person somewhere made an honest mistake. Trust me--I deal with it everyday: No one in the NY, NJ, MD, GA, MA or FL DMV (these are all completely mind-blowingly difficult states) cares in any way, shape or form about the "right thing". They have a rule and they follow it. Someone screws up (even honestly), your car is impounded and it's up to you to fix it. Not for me, thanks. Strangely, given CA's bad rap as a liberal state, they have electronic reporting but they are pretty cool about it. Minor fine and easy to fix.

and its me being selfish not wanting to fork over as much as I do....35 years, NO accidents, I would say the odds are in my favor...and thats what insurance is....fear of something happening..... so, is it really a necessary evil? yup....basically because of lawsuits and medical costs IF one is unfortunate enough....

[BrewfanGRB]

and its me being selfish not wanting to fork over as much as I do....35 years, NO accidents, I would say the odds are in my favor...and thats what insurance is....fear of something happening..... so, is it really a necessary evil? yup....basically because of lawsuits and medical costs IF one is unfortunate enough....

 

You got it. Statistically, you're about as unlikely to have a loss as anyone. The problem is that probability is not zero and like I tell my clients: If the ONE time you do make a mistake and have the ONE accident, if it's the "big one", you'd be ruined w/o insurance. (Or at least your life becomes damn inconvenient). At this point, 6 mos of coverage for my car costs less than 1 monthly payment, so I'm can't gripe too much.

[Deanh]

You got it. Statistically, you're about as unlikely to have a loss as anyone. The problem is that probability is not zero and like I tell my clients: If the ONE time you do make a mistake and have the ONE accident, if it's the "big one", you'd be ruined w/o insurance. (Or at least your life becomes damn inconvenient). At this point, 6 mos of coverage for my car costs less than 1 monthly payment, so I'm can't gripe too much.

2 cars and a teenage step daughter...I cannot say im happy with MY premiums....in the SLIGHTEST.....in fact my bottom feels sore....

[BrewfanGRB]

2 cars and a teenage step daughter...I cannot say im happy with MY premiums....in the SLIGHTEST.....in fact my bottom feels sore....

 

Yeah, you've got me there! I'm grateful every day I don't have that particular bill to pay.