How to buy Motor Vehicle Insurance, Part Two
For Part One, please see the April Newsletter at this link:
.
This month we will complete our tips on buying motor vehicle insurance with
some advice to seek quality in order to protect yourself, your family, and
your passengers.
You Get What You Pay For
You have heard the advertisements that one auto insurance company is the
least expensive, etc. Understand that truth of the old adage applies to
insurance policy purchases: you get what you pay for. The best
company is probably not the cheapest. How can company policies that
save premium costs have adverse impacts upon your wallet?
First, the reason a company is cheaper is that it doesn't pay out as much as
another company, nor does it provide as much service. If your own company
does not pay out in a fair manner, and if you are the defendant in the case
(the
tortfeasor), expect that your chances of being involved in a lawsuit are
much higher than if you were insured with another (quality) company.
Since insurance is going to foot the bill anyway, why should that impact
you? Well, you'll have to be inconvenienced at home, at work, and at trial.
You'll be sued; you will have to take time off of work to see the attorney
who will be hired by your company to represent you; and you'll have to
testify at depositions and/or trial. Remember, you will not be paid lost
wages to participate in your own defense. But in addition to the time
involved, it can be very stressful to be in a lawsuit. You will have to
answer under oath regarding a number of topics, and your spouse may also
have to participate.
However, the biggest impact of adverse treatment to claimants by your own
insurance company may not come when you are a defendant, but may come when
you are a claimant versus your own company. This could be as a claimant
under your own policy, either for payment of medical expenses or payment of
wage loss under the Personal Injury Protection (pip/medpay)
provisions, or for underinsured/uninsured
uim coverage.
It is in these circumstances that many first party carriers become
aggressive and literally cheat their own insureds out of legitimate
payments. Most consumers have little knowledge of these practices, and
aggressive companies are almost always successful in cutting off PIP
payments for treatment far earlier than your own doctor would recommend.
That is where they make the money and that's where you'll find yourself in
need of some help.
The company will respond that you have the right to arbitration. But no
attorney is going to become involved in a Personal Injury Protection/Medical
Pay (PIP/MedPay) arbitration. There is not enough money at stake to merit
the time and effort. You can be at the mercy of the company, so select
wisely. In this respect, the least expensive coverage may be no bargain
at all.
Be aware that the first party carrier that advertises the cheapest price is
likely the one who will deny payment for medical coverage sooner than the
other carriers. They can be quite aggressive in this respect as described in
all of the IME, Medical Care and the PIP/MedPay sections of our member's
site. They will use the ruse of a "records review" or an "independent"
medical examiner (ime)
to deny payments due to your own doctor/chiropractor for your continued
reasonable and necessary care. The so-called "independent" doctor they
select is hired by the insurance industry to (nearly always) say that you
"have reached maximum medical improvement, and no further treatment is
necessary."
The same type of carrier is also the one that will likely seek to limit your
recovery on UIM by requesting arbitration more frequently than other
carriers. These claims involve all of the damages you would expect to
recover from the tortfeasor, including
general damages. Thus, there can be quite a bit of money at stake, since
general damages are usually a multiple of the cost of your medical care.
In evaluating UIM coverage, see if you can find out from your Insurance
Commissioner
Coming soon what percentage of claims are settled, mediated,
arbitrated, or tried to a jury (this jury trial clause is inserted by only a
few companies). Does your Insurance Commissioner have any idea how often a
carrier forces its own insureds into arbitration, rather than agree to the
more desirable non-binding mediation forum? Arbitration and mediation
usually involve attorneys who are knowledgeable in personal injury matters
as mediators or arbitration panel members.
Or, worse, do they force their own UIM claimants to go into court and
present their claim to a jury?
Do you have the right to choose arbitration in UIM? Is your company
deceiving you with a clause that removes your rights to arbitration? Here is
a Specific Question for the Sales Representative Regarding Forcing You to a
Jury Trial
Please check your policy and ask the sales representative to be sure that
your carrier does not reserve the right to a jury trial in its UIM
disputes.
The tricky little phrase used in policies issued in recent years was to the
effect that "disputes hereunder will be resolved by arbitration, unless
either of the parties elects to have the dispute resolved as in other civil
matters". You probably would not see anything wrong with that phrase,
but it is deceptive in its apparent innocence. It is a powerful tool and
will only benefit the insurer.
That little phrase was intended to give the insurance company the right to a
jury trial in resolving your UIM dispute with your own company. If you and
they disagree, you will not have the right to an arbitration; they will just
tell you to go file a court action. And the insurer will always ask
for a jury trial.
Why don't you want a jury trial? First, you will have to pay to use
the court system. You must file the lawsuit, and you will have to serve it
(although they will likely accept mail service). Second, there is likely a
much longer wait (currently one and a half to two years is common) for you
to obtain a jury trial date than there would be to put together an
arbitration panel of attorneys. Who wants the delay? The insurance industry
makes a lot of money on investments, whereas you will always need the cash
to make up for some of the problems caused by the accident. So they want the
delay.
Third, it is tremendously more expensive than any other forum for resolution
in your time and your costs. In arbitration, you can submit medical records
to be read by the arbitration panel, and perhaps call just one of your
doctors. You will pay for any time your doctor has to spend in preparation
and testimony, so you will want the less formal proceeding (such as
arbitration) because her fees will be a fraction of those at trial.
At a jury trial, you must present some live testimony from your doctors.
(Although some records can be admitted without the doctor present, attorneys
usually want the doctor present to speak to the jury; whereas at UIM
arbitration, the attorney knows that the panel of trail attorneys will have
some familiarity with the medical specialty, medical terms, prognosis, etc.,
and your attorney therefore can simply admit the records and argue from
them.) The jury testimony of your doctor is expensive, because you will
likely pay their full time away from the office, including courtroom waiting
time, regardless of the results. It is a delay of a year or two, depending
upon your jurisdiction, and it takes a much greater effort to succeed with
higher risks than at arbitration. Therefore, the company knows that you
are more likely to compromise and accept a lower award than if you went to
arbitration. So please consider this an important issue in selecting
your company.
Think Preventive-Protect Yourself, Your Family, and Your Passengers
We've seen far too many cases where the insured, in an effort to save a
dollar up front, has left himself, his family, or his passengers exposed
with no coverage at all for medical bills. Insurance is a good investment;
it is necessary; and, it should be purchased in anticipation of traumatic
events. How can you foresee only limited consequences of an accident? You
can't.
Here are two examples of places where we have seen insureds deprive
themselves of necessary coverage. The first and most obvious is
pip/medpay. Insured people who have a good medical plan, an HMO, or who
are covered through the military, often think they will rely on their
medical plan and decline to take PIP/MedPay. This is a serious mistake.
Often, medical plans (or military) do not afford anything more than the long
gray line of institutionalized medicine, where treatments and referrals are
very limited. By contrast, your own PIP/MED PAY allows you to select your
own doctor, chiropractor and other health care professionals such as
specialists, with much more freedom of choice. Moreover, PIP also pays a
portion of your wage loss (MED PAY does not). It would be an error to pass
by a chance to purchase PIP.
Please note that your HMO or health plan or military access affords no
protection whatsoever for your passengers. What will you tell the
parents of the children who were riding with your child on an outing when
you cannot cover their medical expenses because another person hit you?
Think About it: You Need to Buy Insurance to Protect Yourself, Family
Members, and Passengers by Purchasing Underinsured Motorist Coverage (UIM)
One serious mistake is to decline
uim coverage. Some companies require that you purchase UIM in the same
amounts as the liability insurance. However, many companies, depending upon
state law, are authorized to sell denominations of UIM coverage less than
the liability limits. The insured thinks that he is providing some
satisfactory minimal coverage for his family and decides to save some money
with lower UIM limits. However, UIM is probably the most important place
to spend money.
You are not as likely to cause an accident, as you are to be a victim of an
accident. At least if you are taking the time to read this article, you are
probably a person who will exercise more care and judgment in your driving
than the ordinary person. Therefore, it is more likely that you will be
making a claim against another person for injuries sustained by you at the
hand of the third party tortfeasor.
In this case, the tortfeasor may (but likely will not) have sufficient
insurance to cover you and your passengers for all of your medical expenses,
wages loss, and general damages. If not, then the tortfeasor is said to be
"underinsured". In that instance, the balance of the value of your claim,
above the bodily injury policy limits of the tortfeasor, is the
responsibility of your own company's UIM coverage.
A third possibility is if the tortfeasor is uninsured. This is a distinct
likelihood if someone who is reckless, or who has a drinking problem or who
is driving with a suspended license involves you in their traffic habits.
They caused you and your passengers harm, but they have no insurance. You
will be making your entire claim under your UIM polity limits.
All too often, we have seen serious injuries to individuals and their
families receive little or partial compensation because the insured elected
to "save money" by not purchasing the maximum UIM coverage available to him.
Purchase as much UIM coverage as you can.
Be Honest
A word of caution in dealing with your insurance company: don't try to
fool them on any of the information requested, or by insuring only one
driver for each of the family vehicles. We have numerous cases holding that
one family member is not covered because he or she was not named as a driver
of another family vehicle. Questions of whether the vehicle was "available
for the regular use" of any individual are complex issues, and history tells
that you will lose. Disclose the full number of drivers and you will have
the knowledge that you and family members are covered.
The same thing pertains to marital status and student status of children.
Our recommendation is to be honest in your application and in your
relationship with your company. The few dollars you "save" otherwise will
never be a bargain should you loose out in the long run. A contract entered
into with materially fraudulent representations can be voidable by the
company under some circumstances. In that case, you would have no coverage
at all.
Table of Insurance Coverage Requirements, by State
Most states require that you have liability insurance. This covers you
when you're at fault in an accident. If you live in New Hampshire, South
Carolina, Tennessee or Wisconsin, you aren't required by law (yet) to have
liability coverage. For the rest of us, the mandatory coverage varies
according to state. In the chart below, minimum liability limits are read as
follows (in thousands of dollars): bodily injury liability for one person in
an accident/bodily injury liability for all people injured in an
accident/property damage liability for one accident.
So, for Alabama, the minimum requirements are $20,000 of bodily injury
liability for one person, $40,000 bodily injury liability for all people and
$10,000 property damage liability.
|
State |
Required coverage types |
Uninsured/Under-insured Motorist Coverage Required? |
Minimum liability limits |
No fault? |
|
Alabama |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
20/40/10 |
no |
|
Alaska |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
50/100/25 |
no |
|
Arizona |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
15/30/10 |
no |
|
Arkansas |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
25/50/25 |
no |
|
California |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
15/30/5 |
no |
|
Colorado |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
25/50/15 |
no |
|
Connecticut |
bodily injury and property damage liability, uninsured motorist |
Yes |
20/40/10 |
no |
|
Delaware |
bodily injury and property damage liability, personal injury
protection |
No |
15/30/10 |
no |
|
DC |
bodily injury and property damage liability, uninsured motorist |
Yes |
25/50/10 |
yes |
|
Florida |
BI liability not required, only property damage liability,
personal injury protection |
No |
10/20/10 |
yes |
|
Georgia |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
25/50/25 |
no |
|
Hawaii |
bodily injury and property damage liability, personal injury
protection |
No |
20/40/10 |
yes |
|
Idaho |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
25/50/15 |
no |
|
Illinois |
bodily injury and property damage liability, uninsured motorist |
Yes |
20/40/15 |
no |
|
Indiana |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
25/50/10 |
no |
|
Iowa |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
20/40/15 |
no |
|
Kansas |
bodily injury and property damage liability, personal injury
protection |
Yes |
25/50/10 |
yes |
|
Kentucky |
bodily injury and property damage liability, personal injury
protection |
No |
25/50/10 |
yes |
|
Louisiana |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
15/30/25 |
no |
|
Maine |
bodily injury and property damage liability, uninsured motorist |
Yes |
50/100/25 |
no |
|
Maryland |
bodily injury and property damage liability, uninsured and
underinsured motorist |
Yes |
20/40/15 |
no |
|
Massachusetts |
bodily injury and property damage liability, personal injury
protection, uninsured motorist |
Yes |
20/40/5 |
yes |
|
Michigan |
bodily injury and property damage liability, personal injury
protection |
No |
20/40/10 |
yes |
|
Minnesota |
bodily injury and property damage liability, personal injury
protection, uninsured and underinsured motorist |
Yes |
30/60/10 |
yes |
|
Mississippi |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
10/20/5 |
no |
|
Missouri |
bodily injury and property damage liability, uninsured motorist |
Yes |
25/50/10 |
no |
|
Montana |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
25/50/10 |
no |
|
Nebraska |
bodily injury and property damage liability, uninsured and
underinsured motorist |
No |
25/50/25 |
no |
|
Nevada |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
15/30/10 |
no |
|
New Hampshire |
Insurance not required; proof of financial responsibility,
medical payments, uninsured motorist |
Yes |
25/50/25 |
no |
|
New Jersey |
bodily injury and property damage liability, personal injury
protection, uninsured motorist |
No |
15/30/5 |
yes |
|
New Mexico |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
25/50/10 |
no |
|
New York |
bodily injury and property damage liability, uninsured
motorist, personal injury protection |
Yes |
25/50/10 |
yes |
|
North Carolina |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
30/60/25 |
no |
|
North Dakota |
bodily injury and property damage liability, personal injury
protection, uninsured and underinsured motorist |
Yes |
25/50/25 |
yes |
|
Ohio |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
12.5/25/7.5 |
no |
|
Oklahoma |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
10/20/10 |
no |
|
Oregon |
bodily injury and property damage liability, personal injury
protection, uninsured and underinsured motorist |
Yes |
25/50/10 |
no |
|
Pennsylvania |
bodily injury and property damage liability, medical payments |
No |
15/30/5 |
yes |
|
Rhode Island |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
Yes |
25/50/25 |
no |
|
South Carolina |
bodily injury and property damage liability, uninsured motorist |
Yes |
15/30/10 |
no |
|
South Dakota |
bodily injury and property damage liability, uninsured motorist |
Yes |
25/50/25 |
no |
|
Tennessee |
Insurance not required; proof of financial responsibility |
No |
25/50/10 |
no |
|
Texas |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
20/40/15 |
no |
|
Utah |
bodily injury and property damage liability, personal injury
protection, uninsured and underinsured motorist |
No |
25/50/15 |
yes |
|
Vermont |
bodily injury and property damage liability, uninsured motorist |
Yes |
25/50/10 |
no |
|
Virginia |
bodily injury and property damage liability, uninsured and
underinsured motorist |
Yes |
25/50/20 |
no |
|
Washington |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
25/50/10 |
no |
|
West Virginia |
bodily injury and property damage liability, uninsured motorist |
Yes |
20/40/10 |
no |
|
Wisconsin |
Insurance not required; proof of financial responsibility,
uninsured motorist |
Yes |
25/50/10 |
no |
|
Wyoming |
bodily injury and property damage liability |
No |
25/50/20 |
no |
|