Any automobile operated by a golf or country club and used to carry members, guests and employees (whether or not a consideration is mobiles charged) shall be written as follows:

If a bus or commercial car—at 20% less than the Private Livery premiums for Public Liability and Property Damage subject to minimum premiums equal to the premiums for a “Y” car in the territory, and at 50% of the Bus premiums for Collision.

The highest rated territory shall be determined for each form of coverage separately and the total premium for, each form of coverage shall be computed accordingly.

Hotel or Camp Bus is an automobile of Camp Busses any type operated by a hotel, summer camp or other resort for the transportation of passengers and baggage to and from railroad stations or docks, excluding other passenger carrying use, and shall be written as follows:

If a bus or commercial car—at 20% less than the Private Livery premiums for Public Liability and Property Damage subject to minimum premiums equal to the premiums for a “Y” car in the territory, and at 50% of the Bus premiums for Collision.

If a private passenger car—at 40% less than the Private Livery premiums for Public Liability and Property Damage subject to minimum premiums equal to the premiums for a “Y” car in the territory, and at the full Private Livery premiums for Collision.

Commercial cars used by hotels, summer camps or other resorts for obtaining supplies or for other commercial delivery work (not for carrying passengers) shall be written at the regular Commercial rates.
A School Bus is an automobile of any type Busses used to carry school children and teachers to and from the school or to and from games and outings. If other passenger carrying use is excluded, such auto-mobiles shall be written as follows:

In those cities or states where the law does not permit a restriction in the policy as to driving operations, public livery cars shall be written at the full taxicab rates pending reference to the home office and announcement of the proper classification.

A Taxicab is any passenger carrying type of automobile not to exceed a designed seating capacity of 7 passengers that is equipped with a taximeter.

Premiums for this class of automobiles are published in the Rate Sheets under the heading of “Taxicabs.”
Taxicabs of the motorcycle type shall be written at a reduction of 25% from the taxicab premiums found in the Rate Sheets.

A Bus is any automobile operated on a public highway to pick up, carry and discharge passengers along a regular route, similar to a street car. Automobiles of the bus type used for sightseeing purposes or other special passenger carrying trips are also included in this classification.

Busses making regular or schedule trips between cities or towns shall be rated for Public Liability,
Property Damage and Collision Insurance in accordance with the rate applicable to the highest rated territory through which the busses operate, provided the distance between the terminal points of the route is less than fifty miles.

If the distance travelled between the terminal points is greater than fifty miles, the following increases in rate shall be applied, to the rate of the highest rated territory through which the busses operate.

This section contains specific rules relating to the insurance of Public Automobiles. For coverages and general policy terms see the General Rule Section; for rules applying not only to Public automobiles but also to Private Passenger and Commercial automobiles see the Miscellaneous Rules Section. Find cheap car insurance quotes.

The Omnibus Coverage privilege shall not be extended to any Public Automobiles (except cars owned by funeral directors included under the “Funeral Directors” rule) insured under any policy.

Public Liability and Property Damage premiums which vary by territory schedule and the class of Public Automobile will be found in the State Rate Sheets.

Collision premiums shall be determined in accordance with the instructions given in the Collision division of the Miscellaneous Rate Section of this Manual.

Electric Public Automobiles are given reductions in premium for P.L., P.D. and Coll. as noted in the Miscellaneous Rate Section.

There are four general classes of Public automobiles:
Automobiles (a) Private Livery Automobiles (c) Taxicabs (b) Public Livery Automobiles (d) Busses
The Public automobile classification also includes hotel omnibuses, school busses, golf and country club busses, funeral cars (excluding hearses), and driverless cars.

(a) A Private Livery automobile is an automobile of the private passenger type rented with chauffeur in attendance from a garage only to be used in connection with social functions, shopping trips, touring and similar work; is not stationed at stands nor used as a jitney and is not used in railroad station work or for short hauls or trip work at standard fares. Policies insuring such automobiles may cover the liability of the named assured for their pleasure use and shall classify them as:

“Rented with chauffeur in attendance to private parties from garage only, for use in connection with social functions, shopping trips, touring and similar work; not equipped with a taximeter and not operated for hire at stands, hotels, stations, on public highways or other public resorts; and not used in short haul and trip work at standard fares.”

Premiums for this class of automobiles are given in the Rate Sheets under the heading “Private Livery Automobiles.”

In some cities or states the law does not permit a policy covering a public automobile to be restricted in its coverage to certain specified driving operations in accordance with the requirements of the Manual. If so, private livery cars shall be written at the full public livery rates pending reference to the home office and announcement of proper classification.

Industrial or Dock trucks Station Trucks shall be treated as follows:
(a) Industrial trucks used in factories, plants or mills for carrying materials about the premises shall be written at the Industrial Truck rates shown in the Miscellaneous Rate Section.

(b) Dock or railway station trucks used for carrying baggage or freight at railway stations, terminals or docks shall be written at the Dock Truck rates shown in the Rate Sheets.

Industrial Trucks, and dock or railway station trucks shall take the lowest gasoline commercial car collision premium for the state in which the risk is located, such premium to be reduced 25% if the vehicle is driven by electric power.

Refer to the “Tractors” and “Farm Tractors and Lawn Mowers” Rules for rates for tractor units used for other purposes.

Commercial automobile used for commercial purposes and also for demonstrating and testing shall be written at the commercial premium applicable, except where the Demonstrating and Testing Premium is higher.

Commercial automobile or altered private Service passenger car used as a “first aid” car for road service in connection with other Commercial automobiles of the assured shall be charged the same rate as the Commercial cars.

Commercial automobiles used to carry passengers for a consideration shall be rated at the full Bus rates.

An endorsement to the following effect shall be used: “In consideration of the reduced premium at which this policy is written the: assured declares that the automobiles insured hereunder are and will be used principally on or about the premises and in connection with the operation of his farm or private estate.”
Funeral directors’ automobiles commonly known as hearses shall be written at the commercial light Class 4 rates less 25% for public liability and property damage except for the New York City territory for which refer to the New York State Rate Sheet.

A tractor (three or four-wheeled motive power vehicle without body) with a two or four-wheeled trailer attached by means of a coupling device or pole, shall be rated as a commercial automobile of a load capacity determined by the load capacity of the trailer, and the trailer shall be insured at 25% of the tractor rate. A tractor with a semi-trailer (two-wheeled trailer attached by means of a kingpin or fifth-wheel) the whole constituting a so-called six- wheeled truck, shall be rated as a commercial automobile of a load capacity determined by the load capacity of the semi-trailer, and the semi-trailer shall be rated at 10%ofthe premium for the tractor.

So-called “caterpillar” tractors, i.e., slow moving vehicles with caterpillar treads, shall be rated as commercial automobiles of “Light” capacity.

Tractors owned and operated by assured who carry a Contractor’s Public Liability policy and who are classified as road and street construction and paving contractors, do not heed to be insured separately under Automobile policies.

If a truck man, express man, warehouseman or transfer company uses under contract one or more particularly described commercial automobiles for one concern only, the classification applicable to that concern shall be used for those automobiles, and an endorsement shall be attached to the policy to the effect that the particularly described automobiles are and will be used during the full policy term only for such concern which shall be named in the policy. If any commercial automobile is used for more than one concern, the full truck men premium shall be charged.

Note: If a truck man uses any of his trucks regularly in hauling for customers whose businesses are classified in Commercial Car Classifications 1 and 2, (for example, newspaper delivery) then the higher of the rates involved shall apply.

Trucks owned by truck men and regularly Truck men used in freight service between cities or towns shall be rated for Public Liability, Property Damage and Collision in accordance with the truck men rate for the highest rated territory through which the trucks operate. The highest rated territory shall be determined for each form of coverage separately and the total premium for each form of coverage shall be computed accordingly.

At the end of each month the Named Assured shall submit to the company a statement of changes in the number of employees during the month, giving (a) for Class 1 the name and location of each additional person and of each person whose employment by the Named Assured has terminated, indicating the date of each such change, and (b) for Class 2 any increase or decrease in the number of persons at each location.

The company shall retain each monthly report and premium adjustment shall be made on a pro rata basis for changes in the number of persons. The earned premium shall be calculated in the same manner as the advance premium on the basis of the number of employees employed by the Named Assured during the policy term. All premium adjustments shall be made at the rates in force on the effective date of the policy.

The minimum annual premium for Class 2 coverage shall be $20.00 public liability and $10.00 property damage, standard limits. There shall be no separate minimum premium for Class 1 coverage under such a policy.

An endorsement to the following effect shall be used:
“In consideration of the premium herein provided, it is hereby agreed between the Named Assured and the Company that this policy covers the legal liability of the Named Assured (and of the Named Assured only) for bodily injuries and property damage, as provided in the policy, arising out of accidents resulting from the use of any automobile and/or motorcycle, of the private passenger type, in the business of the Named Assured except any automobile or motorcycle which at the time of the accident is:

1. Owned in whole or in part by the Named Assured or by the individual partners thereof, if the Named Assured is a co-partnership.
2. Hired or leased by the Named Assured.
3. Registered in the name of the Named Assured.

Automobiles) whether compensated on a salary or commission basis, a policy may be written, without specifying any automobiles or motorcycles, to cover the complete liability of the Named Assured for the operation in the Named Assured’s business of any automobile and/or motorcycle, of the private passenger type, except an automobile or motorcycle.

(1) Owned in whole or in part by the Named Assured or by the individual partners thereof, if the Named Assured is a co-partnership,
(2) Hired or leased by the Named Assured, or
(3) Registered in the name of the Named Assured.

For the purpose of premium the employees of the Assured are divided into two classes as follows:
Class 1. (a) All outside employees whether compensated on a salary and/or commission basis whose usual duties involve the use of automobiles or motorcycles, not herein excluded, in the business of the Named Assured, and (b) All other employees whether compensated on a salary and/or commission basis whose usual duties involve the use of automobiles or motorcycles, not herein excluded, in the business of the Named Assured who receive a specific operating allowance of any kind (operating allowance meaning rate per mile; gas, oil, tire or upkeep allowance; where the salary, commission or terms of employment contemplate the use of an automobile or motorcycle).

Class 2. All other employees whether compensated on a salary and/or commission basis, not included in Class 1, Every person included in Class 1 must be named in the schedule provided in the endorsement which must be attached to the policy. It is not necessary to name the persons included in Class 2 but the number of such persons must be stated in the schedule. The policy provides automatic coverage allowing the assured thirty days within which to report changes in persons in both classes.

If the Named Assured has employees located in or operating out of various cities or towns, the schedule must disclose each such location for each person in Class 1, and the number of Class 2 persons in each city or town at which the Named Assured operates.

In consideration of the statement made by the named assured that the automobile described herein will be placed in operation on the date stated below, it is agreed that this policy is hereby reinstated in full force and effect on and after that date, but the company shall in no event be liable for any accident occurring prior to the date of reinstatement stated herein, and subsequent to the date of suspension. On account of the provisions of the suspension endorsement heretofore attached to this policy the named assured is hereby granted and acknowledges receipt of the following pro rata return premium.

Exception: Pro rata cancellation may be allowed if (a) the car insured is disposed of and the assured takes out a new policy for a year in the same company on another automobile to become effective within thirty days from date of cancellation, or (b) if the automobile insured is stolen or destroyed, pro rata cancellation may be allowed on the class of coverage not Involved in the loss.

If a form of coverage is cancelled from a policy at the request of the assured during the term of the policy, cancellation shall be effected on the short rate basis.

Policies issued to cover any Public automobile, or policies issued on the “named driver” or “specified car” basis to cover automobile manufacturers or automobile dealers shall name only one assured, except at an extra charge of 5% of the full Public Liability and Property Damage premium (but not for Collision) for one additional named assured, l]/2% for two additional named assured and 10% for three or more additional named assured. Policies issued on the “named driver” basis shall not cover the operation of automobiles by other than the driver named in the policies, or by some other person when accompanied in the automobile by the “named driver”. The charge for additional assured does not permit others than the “named driver” to operate automobiles, except when accompanied by the “named driver.”

Exceptions:

(1) Policies issued in the name of commissions, trustees, or receivers, shall include the liability of such Commissions, Trustees, Receivers and/or the liability of the individual members thereof without additional charge.

(2) Policies insuring school busses may be extended without additional charge to cover the liability of school boards, the individual members thereof, the owners and the drivers of the busses. These interests shall not be covered without being specifically named and no other interests shall be covered except at the regular additional assured charges.

(3) Omnibus coverage may be granted without additional charge in connection with cars owned by funeral directors insured under “Funeral Directors” rule.

(4) For additional assured in connection with policies (other than “named driver” or “specified car”) issued to cover garages, automobile manufacturers and automobile dealers, see “Additional Assured—Garage Policies” rule.

How Rates Are Determined

For example, Massachusetts turned down numerous requests by insurers to increase auto insurance rates in the 1970s while North Carolina imposed a six percent cap on the annual rate increase. Essentially, insurers were barred from collecting sufficient premiums from certain high risk drivers to fund the losses incurred by those drivers and at the same time were barred from raising prices to other drivers sufficient to fund the losses of the high risk groups. Lacking sufficient resources to fund losses, insurers ceased to cover those losses voluntarily.

The greater responsiveness of open-competition laws permits insurers to move more quickly to meet changing circumstances and thus help to stabilize profits. This effect was borne out in the Litzenberger/Nye study which indicated wildly fluctuating profits in highly regulated states and relatively stable profit levels in the open- competition state of California.

Also, any form of prior-approval law places the regulatory authorities under more pressure to hold rates down, since they must actively approve rates before they go into effect. Obviously, the approval of rate increases is not politically popular, and most insurance commissioners obtain their positions through political means, either by direct election or through appointment by an elected governor. Thus, there may be great pressure on regulators to hold rates down artificially, in essence refusing to allow insurers to collect sufficient premiums to fund their losses. Open-competition law7s, by removing the requirement of active approval of rates, take away some political pressure to hold rates down artificially.

Generally, auto insurers prefer competitive rating laws, because they involve less bureaucratic hassle, make it easier to maintain rates that are consistent with costs, contribute to greater profit stability, and help insurers to keep their business more manageable and predictable. In noncompetitive states, insurers are exposed to the constant threat that a refusal by state authorities to approve adequate rates will cause them to operate without sufficient profits to attract needed capital, a negative business condition, which, if allowed to continue long enough, will drive them from the market entirely.

Most insurers, like many others, simply believe, with Adam Smith, that the “invisible hand” of the free market is the best way of assuring at the same time both the health of business and the best possible array of products at the best prices to consumers. In competitive rating states, consumers are assured the lowest possible rates for insurance consistent with costs and more choice about insurers, coverages and policies than in noncompetitive states.

Does rating regulation affect auto insurance availability and affordability?

The report notes that “a high degree of rate regulation did not induce either lower or more stable returns to investment in the private passenger automobile market.”

The volatility and inadequacy in some cases of insurer profitability destabilizes capital inflows and outflows and results in volatile premium rates. In addition, with average profitability as high, or higher, in regulated states than average profitability in the open competition state of California, the expectation is that average premium rates would also be as high or higher in the regulated states, thus producing no consumer price benefit from regulation.

The analysis of the comparative residua! market presence in the three highly regulated states showed, as did the GAO study, that regulation appeared to reduce the availability of coverage in the voluntary market. For the period 1980-1985 the residual markets in Massachusetts, New Jersey and North Carolina represented 47.4, 41.7 and 26.4 percent of the total market in those states, respectively.

The comparable figure in California was 3.4 percent. (Again, however, states with compulsory insurance laws are being compared to a state that did not have a compulsory insurance liability law until 1984; the effect of this variable is unknown.) The proportion of motorists for which no insurer was willing to compete was on average roughly 14, 12, and 8 times greater in Massachusetts, New Jersey, and North Carolina, respectively, than in California, despite the best intentions of regulators in those states.

On the other hand, there are other states with a high degree of regulation and a much smaller percentage of drivers who must obtain coverage in the involuntary market—again indicating that factors other than the type of rating regulation affect auto insurance availability and affordability.

Another recent study confirming the view that open competition works to the benefit of consumers to keep direct insurance prices down is the California Insurance Department’s Study of the Availability and Affordability of Automobile Insurance in Los Angeles County.

According to the department data, during the three-year period beginning 1982, the industry incurred an 8.6 percent loss, which was offset by investment income of 11-13 percent. “It does not appear that the resultant profit is excessive,” the study noted. It concluded that “insurance rates charged by the major insurers are, in general, supported by their aggregate loss experience data.”

Open competition is often blamed for a lack of competition for the business of high risk drivers, but it is unclear that there is any causal relationship between the open competition system of rate regulation and the problems of affordability and availability for certain drivers. Free market competition by definition means that competitors may at any time make a business decision not to compete. Even under the most rigorous system of rate regulation, any private insurance company may simply decide that business conditions indicate its best business strategy is to leave that market, that is, not to compete.

Therefore, it is unclear that a system of rating regulation affects availability, and, indeed, this observation is borne out by the GAO study, which found that there was more voluntary market availability (and thus competition) in open competition than in prior approval states, but that rating regulation did not overall affect availability one way or the other due to the existence of state plans.

Finally, another study, discussed some of the important questions not addressed in the GAO study. These experts said that the two key barometers in comparing competitive versus noncompetitive rating are level of profitability and size of residual market. The report compared recent data under open competition in California to data about the highly-regulated states of Massachusetts, New Jersey and North Carolina.

As to effect of rating laws on direct auto insurance availability, the GAO report found that there was less insurance available in the voluntary market in prior approval states; the average percentage of insurance purchased through the involuntary market in competitive rating states was 1.92 percent versus 12.24 percent in noncompetitive rating states. Overall availability of insurance was unaffected by state rating laws because of the existence of assigned risk and other involuntary market plans.

The GAO report noted, in addition, that the goals of affordability and availability are totally interrelated. The report said, “Regulatory policies designed to make insurance more affordable by constraining rate increases or by subsidizing the cost of insurance in the involuntary market could threaten the profitability of insurers and create availability problems.”

In sum, the GAO study clearly indicated that generally auto insurance costs more in prior approval states. It also indicated that there was less availability of voluntary market insurance in prior approval states, but that the difference was made up by state insurance plans. The report did not consider the effect of rating regulation on insurer solvency or the question of the effect of prior approval versus open competition on the adequacy of rates or the issue of consumer satisfaction with the various kinds of rate regulation, all of which are vitally important questions that must be answered before reaching a satisfactory answer about which approach to rating is best.

Another study focuses on rate regulation not just in the area of auto insurance but in all lines.
In 1986, a comprehensive statistical study of the commercial insurance business was conducted by Phillip R. O’Connor and Kathleen A. Carlson on behalf of the Illinois Insurance Committee on Tort Reform to determine whether some forms of rate regulation are of greater benefit to consumers than others.

The 1986 study focused on insurance loss ratios, which represent the proportion of dollars which an insurer pays out in losses for each dollar of premiums received. For most lines of insurance loss ratios are considered the best measure of consumer value, because the higher the loss ratio the greater the amount of premium dollar being returned to the purchasers of insurance to pay for claims.

The 1986 study was updated to include in the 10-year period the two years, 1985 and 1986, of the “insurance liability crisis.” The update replicated the original findings: There is no statistical evidence that prior approval systems of rate regulation benefit consumers more than open competition systems of regulation. In fact, for one line of insurance, Other Liability, the evidence actually points in the other direction.

There has been considerable study of the effects of the various rate regulatory systems on the price of direct car insurance and the value which accrues to policyholders. Most of these studies have been performed by government agencies and independent scholars.

A large body of empirical work has addressed the question of whether regulatory lag has an impact on the balance issue— maintaining a balance between the need to ensure insurer solvency on the one hand and the responsibility to ensure consumers are treated fairly on the other. Among these studies, the New York Insurance Department (1969) found that regulatory delay tends to cause price increases to lag behind increases in loss costs when costs are increasing, and to cause price decreases to lag behind decreases in loss costs during periods when costs are falling. However, this study assumed that long-run prices will be equal under either competitive systems or prior approval, a conclusion supported by later research.

Perhaps the most extensive study to date of the issue is found in an August 1986 report to Congress by the Government Accounting Office. The purpose of the report is to compare how open competition and prior approval rate regulation affect the cost and availability of auto insurance to consumers. The GAO used two measures of automobile insurance costs, average inflation-adjusted premiums and average premiums per dollar of losses, for the period 1975-1983.

Are Car Insurance Premiums Lower in Competitive States?

The report found that for physical damage coverage premiums were significantly lower in competitive rating states. Overall, liability premiums tended to be somewhat higher in competitive rating states, according to the study. However, the study found that the higher rates in competitive states reflected factors other than rate regulation. Indeed, even in the liability area, when all the other variables that may influence premiums were taken into account through regression analysis (see table p. 98, in GAO study) GAO data show that liability coverage premiums were only 5 percent lower in prior approval states.

Of note, with liability coverage, especially in states where it is compulsory, the political process acts to keep prices for basic coverage low, sometimes so low that insurers are denied an adequate profit, or any profit at all. But there is less political interest in property insurance since property coverages are not required by law and generally are purchased only for vehicles with a high book value—many people drop collision and comprehensive once a car begins to show its age. (Property coverages—collision and comprehensive—are usually required by lenders, however.)

A further weakness of the GAO study is that it took no account of how different regulatory schemes were implemented. A file and use system can be implemented by a regulator in a fashion that resembles the most rigorous of prior approval systems.

Find direct auto insurance quotes online. Generally cycles are classed as motor vehicles and the two- wheel vehicle, whether it be a bicycle or a motorcycle, has the same rights and duties as an automobile or truck.
The bicyclist or the motorcycle operator must observe traffic signals the same as an automobile driver.

Many youngsters riding- bicycles today develop the idea that traffic lights do not apply to them. This, of course, is wrong. They must obey traffic signals just the same as a tractor-trailer operator. Failure to do so could spell out negligence.

Bicyclists & Motorcyclists Hit By Car – Actual court case

Decedent, a young man eighteen years of age, was riding east upon his bicycle. A collision resulted between the automobile and the bicycle whereby the young man was fatally injured. The evidence was in direct conflict, both as to the respective speeds of automobile and bicycle and as to which side of the center line of the street was the place of the collision.

Reversing judgment for the plaintiff, the Court held that the bicycle rider was obliged to adapt himself to the rules of the street as applied to the great body of its traffic, namely, motor vehicles, and in the event of a collision with a motor vehicle, the duty of care of the driver of a bicycle and the driver of a motor vehicle is mutual and reciprocal, and will be measured by the same rules of the road.

Compare direct insurance quotes from the following providers in your state. Aside from reform of existing laws of negligence and damages, any blueprint to upgrade the workings of the fault auto insurance system must be accompanied by improvements in the court system itself. The existence of court congestion, regardless of its cause, is intolerable. Automobile lawsuits are often referred as a “cancer in our court system”. In some urban areas, a case may languish as long as five years on the docket before being brought to jury trial.

The solution is not to deny individuals with legitimate disagreements access to impartial justice. Use of the judicial system cannot be forfeited for what is inexpensive or expedient. One obvious solution is the appointment of more judges and the construction of more courtrooms, often obsolete and inadequate for the volume of business. As a social cost, it is far less expensive to expand the courts than abolish the right to use the court system for all except those litigants representing huge financial interests.

Criminal law and corporate battles may someday be all that remains of the adversary system. In addition, greater latitude must be given para judicial court staff to deal effectively with the more routine court matters that burden the limited number of trial judges now on the bench. The staff of any clerk’s office is competent to handle chores such as the call of the trial list, the handling of certain undisputed motions, requests for postponements, and so forth. The potential of para judicial personnel has scarcely been tapped.

No Fault Auto Insurance Basics

Such people could be employed to advantage at the pretrial stage, to hear and sift through the issues and find areas of agreement, encourage settlement, and conserve the time spent on trials. Also, court schedules should be lengthened, and modern data processing techniques used to eliminate the administrative waste tied to old-fashioned compilation of records and documents. Despite the original pleas for no-fault auto insurance as a means of lifting the burdens on the courts, they can look forward to growing numbers of automobile cases; since states are heading toward dual fault-no-fault systems, lawsuit volume may be on the rise. No-fault plans split some claims into several pieces.

An automobile accident that formerly resulted in one claim may now generate two or three separate lawsuits. To reduce court traffic significantly, the smaller claim must be eliminated entirely or made subject to compulsory arbitration. Plans such as Illinois has adopted, which have compulsory arbitration built into them, have taken a major step toward erasing the small claim from the docket. Compulsory arbitration of cases below $3,000 could result in a reduction of 80-90 per cent of the courts’ automobile accident business. This step is not designed to deny any accident victim access to the courts, but only to provide a forum for quick and relatively informal hearings.

The courts are only one cause of delay in lawsuits. As U.S.Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger put it, “Lawyers are competitive creatures, and the adversary system encourages tension and often rewards delay.” To counteract this, the plan used in the province of Ontario might be considered. When a defendant makes an attempt in good faith to settle a lawsuit, the offer is transmitted on a “payment into court” basis. If the plaintiff refuses the offer and is later totally unsuccessful or recovers a verdict less than the original offer, he is charged the defendant’s costs of litigation. The plan is designed to create incentives for the parties to settle their disputes amicably, by making the failure to do so financially unattractive.

Check out direct car insurance rates from these selected providers in your state.

This theory would work as follows: The automobile insurer, learning that the claimant received the payment of his wages while incapacitated from a collateral source, would be required to seek out the institution or individual paying this money. A lien—a hold on claim proceeds for wage payments—would be used to refund the money obtained from this source.

The amount of the lien would be set off against what was eventually recovered by the victim. Because the double payment has placed an added burden on the cost of automobile accidents, by permitting the injured to collect twice for the same damage, ending double wage-recovery would bring about a real gain.

Medical expenses is another weak area in the law of damages. At present, a victim is entitled to be compensated for the fair and reasonable amount of medical expense associated with his injury. No-fault has blindly followed this path without even a token attempt at changing this standard.

No Fault Auto Insurance Laws

Proposals such as the AIA plan call for payment of unlimited medical charges based upon the indefinite standard of the “fair and reasonable.” Because some no-fault plans have tied the amount of a victim’s medical bill to his right to be compensated for pain and suffering, a demand has been created for a fixed price list of medical services. For example, such routine procedures as examinations, suturing, and so forth could all be assigned a predetermined medical cost. Price and services rendered would be measured objectively.

At the same time that accident benefits paid to victims are being drastically reduced and reformers are clamoring for the removal of legal fees from insurance costs, the medical profession has been given a blank check to charge whatever it deems reasonable and fair for its services.

The law needs changing and so do the methods by which the law is administered. The bar’s lack of success in opposing the no-fault movement is in large measure due to media- stimulated disapproval of its stake in the perpetuation of the tort system. The contingent fee, exploited by the no-fault reformers, has called into question the bar’s motivation in opposing no-fault and contributed to the bar’s ineffectiveness in gaining support for its position.

Tort Insurance Laws

The contingent fee was fostered by the idea that even the poorest man could afford the best lawyer if he did not have to pay him from his own pocket—the lawyer would wait until his case was decided, when he could pay. It was on this promise that lawyers were able to represent indigent clients. The plaintiff benefited from the contingent fee, because, if he were unsuccessful, he owed his attorney nothing.

A better method of handling the contingent fee could be formulated. It is the policy of the American Trial Lawyers Association that every client be offered a choice of engaging a lawyer on a contingent-fee basis or on the basis of an hourly charge. The Cotter plan, originating in Connecticut and later adopted by Illinois, limits the amount of the contingent fee to 25 per cent. The Hart-Magnuson proposal for a national insurance system treats the problem of legal fees by restricting contingent fees to non-economic recoveries; for economic losses, an hourly rate must be charged.

But the solution is not a legislative matter alone. The time has come for the American bar to recognize that ordinary lawsuits should not entail contingent fees in excess of one- third of the gross recovery. Fee arrangements should be reasonable. In setting the fee, careful consideration should be given to all factors, including the size of the recovery and the complexity of the lawsuit. Find direct car insurance online.

Looking for a direct auto insurance quote in your area? Simply select your state to view direct quotes from top providers in your area. Most states are tort auto insurance states.

Closely following modification of the degrees of negligence is the need to restructure the law of damages. The tort of negligence is divided into two components. Negligence must be shown, and, once that barrier is overcome, proof of damages must follow. Just as a softening of the law of negligence was suggested to broaden the number of individuals eligible for compensation, there is a necessity to update the law of damages. The objective is to pay more victims but in more precise relationship to the actual loss, thus eliminating the extravagances of the tort system.

At present, damages designed to compensate for lost wages are measured by the victim’s loss of earning capacity. The law has shown a preference for loss of earning capacity over payment of actual lost wages; the distinction that has developed through a number of court decisions fixes recovery on the amount of compensation that could have been earned had the injured been able to work, instead of computing his out-of-pocket loss.

The loss is paid as a potential rather than real loss. An accident victim will receive more money than if he had worked. Loss of earning capacity creates additional waste by returning gross earnings—wages payable before taxes, instead of net earnings. No-fault plans proposed to date take this overpayment into consideration by reimbursing 75-85 per cent of gross earnings.

The same saving could easily be adopted by the tort auto insurance system to reduce its wage reparation costs. Suppose that a man is injured in an automobile accident and he is awarded damages. Under the laws of most states, if he were working and his earning capacity were $100 per week before taxes, he would be compensated for a full $100 per week. This happens even though his in-pocket income after taxes was $80 per week.

Is there any justification for bestowing an additional $20 because he is an accident victim? Tort recovery is tax exempt. Even if he had been unemployed at the time of his accident, the victim would be compensated at the same rate upon proof that he was ready, willing, and able to work but could not do so because of his injury.

By paying for loss of earning capacity, there are numerous situations in which double payments are made to accident victims. This duplication results from the victim’s receiving funds from wage-continuation programs available at his job as well as money from private collateral sources, such as insurance policies, in addition to tort payments for the same damages. As we saw, the Massachusetts version of no-fault tries to eliminate the double recovery of earnings by requiring the claimant to exhaust his private collateral resources before looking to his no-fault policy.

Because the accident victim is forced to depend on his collateral resources for damages that are legitimately within the province of automobile insurance, any cost reduction becomes an illusion. The cost is transferred to activities other than automobile accidents. In place of this, a corporation or insurance company that makes a voluntary or contractual payment to an injured person for lost wages due to an automobile accident should be reimbursed directly by the insurer as part of the final adjustment of a claim.

Re-allocating these funds from automobile insurance by recycling them back into collateral wage sources is desirable under fault or no-fault as a way to force the automobile to pay its own way. Get a direct auto insurance quote today!

Enter your postal code to compare direct auto insurance quotes in your state instantly.

Tort States:
Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wyoming.

No-Fault States:
Florida, Hawaii, Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Utah.

Closely following modification with the degrees of negligence may be the need to restructure regulations of damages. The tort of negligence is split into two components. Negligence must be shown, and, once that barrier is overcome, evidence of damages are required to follow. Just as a softening from the law of negligence was suggested to broaden the number of individuals qualified to receive compensation, there is a necessity to update the law of damages. The objective is to pay more victims but in more precise relationship towards the actual loss, thus eliminating the extravagances from the tort system.

Tort System versus No-Fault Auto Insurance

Currently, damages built to compensate for lost pay are measured through the victim’s loss in earning capacity. What the law states has shown a preference for lack of earning capacity over payment of actual lost pay; the distinction which includes developed via a number of court decisions fixes recovery around the amount of compensation that could have been earned had the injured had the opportunity to work, as opposed to computing his out-of-pocket loss.

Losing is paid as a potential as opposed to real loss. An accident victim will receive more money than if he’d worked. Loss in earning capacity creates additional waste by returning gross earnings-wages payable before taxes, as opposed to net earnings. No-fault plans proposed thus far take this overpayment into account by reimbursing 75-85 % of gross earnings.

Exactly the same saving could be adopted through the tort system to reduce its wage reparation costs. Guess that a man is injured in an automobile accident and that he is awarded damages. Under the laws of most states, if he were working and his awesome earning capacity were $100 per week before taxes, however be compensated to get a full $100 each week. This happens despite the fact that his in-pocket income after taxes was $80 weekly. Is there any justification for bestowing one more $20 because he is definitely an accident victim? Tort recovery is tax exempt.

Even when he had been unemployed during the time of his accident, the victim could be compensated at the same rate upon proof he was ready, willing, and able to work but sometimes not achieve this because of his injury.

If you are paying for loss of earning capacity, there are numerous situations where double debts are paid to accident victims. This duplication comes from the victim’s receiving funds from wage-continuation programs around at his job in addition to money from private collateral sources, for example insurance policies, along with tort payments for the same damages. Once we saw, the Massachusetts version of no-fault tries to eliminate the double recovery of earnings by requiring the claimant to exhaust his private collateral resources before seeking to his no-fault auto insurance policy.

Since the accident victim needs to depend on his collateral practical information on damages that are legitimately within the province of auto insurance, any cost reduction becomes an illusion. The fee is used in activities apart from automobile accidents. Compare direct auto insurance quotes now!

Instead of this, a corporation or insurance company that makes a voluntary or contractual payment to an injured person for lost wages due to a vehicle accident ought to be reimbursed directly by the insurer as part of the final adjustment of the claim. Re-allocating these funds from automobile insurance by recycling it well into collateral wage sources is desirable under fault or no-fault in order to force the car to pay its own way.

Looking for direct auto insurance quotes online? Are you interested in learning more about no fault auto insurance? Continue reading

The application of gross negligence to motor vehicle collisions has survived with the blessing of the insurance industry. The opposed the elimination of this barrier because of its reluctance to boost the number of injured persons who could recover tort damages also, since it feared collusion between host and guest to generate fraudulent claim situations where the guest could successfully recover from the host’s insurance company.

Withholding compensation to passengers by forcing these to prove gross negligence against their host is a serious flaw inside the fault system. The cure is simple. Guest passengers ought to be allowed to recover tort damages through evidence of ordinary negligence by their hosts, Several states, following the lead of Wisconsin, have already eliminated the need to prove gross negligence in guest-passenger cases and also have not came up with problems projected from the industry.

The 3rd side from the triangle requires the defendant to keep from willful, wanton, and reckless misconduct. This standard is applied to those persons-such as trespassers- that are owed less care by the defendant than even within a guest-host relationship. Here the defendant is only required to avoid willfully, wantonly, or recklessly injuring such a person. Since hardly any automobile injuries fall in this particular third degree, this standard has little significance in automobile litigation.

No-Fault Auto Insurance And Contributory Negligence

Having decrease the levels of negligence, we currently turn to require eliminating a few of the harsh defenses open to those who cause accidents. The defendant is normally going to be represented by his insurance carrier, which may be called a “professional defendant” and therefore has a large stake in perpetuating legal obstacles. The most unfair defense available will be the doctrine of contributory negligence. Contributory negligence bars a plaintiff from all of recovery, should he be located to have contributed even slightly to his own injury. Contributory negligence has been defined as the possible lack of that amount of care a fair man would exercise to provide for his own safety. Contributory negligence should be replaced with comparative negligence.

Comparative negligence allows a person to recover damages proportional to his own degree of negligence. If it’s determined that the victim contributed 25 % to his own injury, the plaintiff is compensated for 75 per cent of his total damages. Instead of being denied everything, the victim loses merely a portion from his full recovery due to his own carelessness. But, if someone is more than Half responsible for his own accident, he is barred all recovery. Contributory negligence works to bar the victim who contributes even 1 percent to their own accident and is also 99 percent blameless. Had comparative negligence statutes been adopted sooner, the objection that the fault system excluded many deserving persons from recovery do not need been as valid as a possible argument meant for no-fault auto insurance. As we saw, while Oregon and Massachusetts were enacting their no-fault reforms, they simultaneously enacted comparative negligence statutes.

Searching for direct insurance quotes in your state? There are two types of car insurance based upon the  no-fault auto insurance system or tort system. Your state will have one or the other.

Most of the emphasis on automobile insurance reform has taken place on the no-fault front. In solving automobile insurance ills, state governments have seemingly eliminated from their strategy a serious look at improving the tort negligence system. Yet, thus far, states that have altered their methods of compensating accident victims are winding up with a combination of fault and no-fault. While the search for the ideal no-fault solution continues, it is equally important to repair what remains of the traditional liability structure.

As we have seen, the law of negligence originated as a by-product of the Industrial Revolution and was designed for the protection of defendants—the courts sought to confine entrepreneurial risk to those accidents where negligence could be shown. Vestiges of that desire to cut down the defendant’s risk remain imbedded within the law today. In salvaging the fault system, the first step is to survey the law of negligence to eliminate the outworn but pervasive doctrines that are still in force. The second step is to modify the harsh impact of negligence law affecting the compensation of innocent victims.

Third, we must re-evaluate the justifications for denying compensation to certain individuals. Finally, we must mold the three into an insurance program that minimizes waste and maximizes benefits to the accident victim.

At present, the law of negligence is littered with overly fine distinctions that hinder justice. With the development of the law of negligence through case-by-case decisions, the concept was broken down into rulings that reflect a nineteenth-century logic but do not always result in equitable benefit allowance for twentieth-century accident victims. It has been divided into a triangle of degrees: ordinary negligence, gross negligence, and willful, wanton, and reckless misconduct. Division of rights into these categories acts to exclude entire groups of injured motorists from any compensation at all.

Ordinary negligence we have defined earlier as the degree of care that a “reasonable man” is expected to exercise in a given situation. This standard is applied in driver- versus-driver situations. Both owe each other the obligation of exercising ordinary care, because they are coequal in status while using the public highway. This principle adapts well to automobile accidents.

No-Fault Auto Insurance Information

There are persons on the highway who are not treated as equals under no-fault auto insurance coverage. If the relationship is guest-host, the host is held to a lesser standard of care than in driver-versus-driver situations. In order for a guest to recover from his host, he must prove that his host was not only negligent but grossly negligent. Gross negligence is defined as the absence of that degree of care that even a careless man would exercise. Get direct insurance quotes online!

This logic is based upon the inhospitable premise that you do not owe a guest very much regard for his safety, since you are doing him a favor. Because about one-third of all automobile accident injuries take place in single-car accidents—for example, a collision caused by a car hitting a tree—the retention of gross negligence as the standard for the guest-host relationship excludes all but a small handful of passengers who are injured in these one-car accidents. Passengers have been unable to collect against their own driver for their injuries, because it is extremely difficult to produce sufficient proof to establish this higher degree of fault.

Not only does the law allow damages for physical pain and suffering, but also for mental pain and anguish, provided it accompanies a physical injury. According to the weight of authority, where there is fright or mental shock which is unaccompanied by physical injuries, no recovery can be had.

Actual court case
In an old but famous court decision, a woman was about to board a horse-drawn streetcar, of a long forgotten era. The rambunctious team of horses bolted and started toward the would-be passenger. The lady thought she was going to be trampled by the horses and fainted. The horses came within inches of her, but did not actually touch her. As a result of the terrible fright, the woman suffered a miscarriage and subsequent illness. The Court held that there could be no recovery for fright, occasioned by the negligence of the driver of the team, as long as the woman suffered no physical injury.

Permanent injuries. The effects of an injury are either temporary or permanent. It is most important in arriving at a settlement valuation to know whether the effects of the injury are permanent.

People who have had workmen’s compensation claims often think the same rules apply in automobile claims. That is not true. Auto insurance quotes

In workmen’s compensation, they have what are called “scheduled awards.” So many weeks’ compensation are allowed for a percentage loss of use of an eye, an arm, a leg, etc. There is no such rule in automobile cases.

You have to use your good common sense to determine what a permanent injury is worth. Once again, what would a jury say?

Sometimes the doctors can measure the functional loss of use of an arm or a leg in terms of percentage; that is, the doctors can say that the claimant has 15 or 25 per cent loss of use of the right arm. A person’s sight or hearing may be impaired to the extent of 40 or 50 per cent. You should try to have your doctor determine the degree of permanency of your injury in terms of percentage.

Example
Blank, a prominent local businessman, came home from a wedding party in a hopelessly intoxicated condition—tried to negotiate a turn at high speed—skidded up over the curb, striking a pedestrian. The pedestrian was bruised, not badly. But, oh, were his feelings hurt!

Normally his claim, including all expenses, would have been settled for about $235. But because of the dramatic circumstances attending the accident and the flagrant negligence of Mr. Blank, the insurance company was glad to get rid of the case for $450.

It is true that generally juries do not consider punitive damages—sometimes called “smart money.” But as a practical proposition, juries are apt to lay on the damages pretty thick when the defendant is guilty of intoxication or some flagrant disregard of the rights of others.
Scars. How much is a scar worth? Picture yourself on the jury —how much would you award someone with a similar scar?

Here are several important factors to consider:
1. Scars are more damaging to women than men.
2. Scars are more damaging to the young than the old.
3. They bring more to the single than the married.
4. They bring more if they hamper your wage-earning ability.
5. They are more damaging to the Beauty than the Beast.
6. Do the scars hinder a career that involves public appearance—stage, screen, television, modeling, etc.?
7. Can they be removed or improved by surgery? If so, what is the estimated cost of surgery and consequent hospital confinement?
8. Location and size of scar. The more prominent it is, the more it is worth. A scar on your face is worth more than if it were on your neck. In most cases, if the scar is hidden by your clothing, it has little, if any, value.

A parent is entitled to the services and earnings of a minor child. When a child is injured in an automobile accident, the parent ordinarily can collect for such loss of services and earnings.
Liability affects value. The value of a case is definitely tied in with the question of liability. Theoretically, you ought to be able to say whether a person against whom you are making the claim is liable or not—or, as the insurance men say, whether it is a of “liability.” Unfortunately, it is not that easy. In many cases you cannot say definitely whether it is black or white.

Where liability is clear, it is easier for you to insist that the amount of your damage be paid. But where liability is quest; able, then the direct car insurance company is apt to come up with a c< promise settlement proposal.

The importance of medical reports and testimony appear in the following. Court case:

Mrs. X contended she sustained a fracture of the left clavicle and contusion of the left shoulder and upper chest—and that a cancer developed, requiring the removal of her breast.

The testimony of the doctor who attended her for four weeks following the accident indicated that there was no breast injury. He did not remember examining her breasts and made no note of doing so.

She alleged that within two months a little pimple became evident on the left breast in the armpit. It did not bother her much for about three and a half years when it became as hard and as big as a nut. Only one expert medical witness appeared in her behalf—he was neither a breast nor a cancer specialist and was first consulted the night before he testified. To challenge his testimony a specialist was called by the other side (defendant).

The jury brought in a verdict in favor of Mrs. X for $45,000. Her husband was awarded $1,000 for her medical expenses and $5,000 for loss of her services.

The decision of the Court was:

“We are satisfied that the breast cancer from which the plaintiff unfortunately suffered was not caused by the accident. Ruling the cancer out of consideration, a generous allowable recovery would be $10,000 to the plaintiff and $1,000 to the husband for loss of services, in addition to the $1,000 awarded him for his own injury.

“A word should be said about any new trial, in the event that the plaintiffs should elect not to stipulate to a reduction of the judgment and decide to press their claim that the cancer was caused by the accident.

“Plaintiffs should be expected in that event to have the doctors who observed and treated plaintiff’s wife after her accident give such testimony as they might be able and qualified to give as to whether the injuries they observed could have caused the cancer in the location in which it developed. The surgeon who performed the breast operation should be called for such relevant testimony as he might give and one or more recognized authorities on breast cancer should be called.” Direct insurance.

On appeal the Court held the medical evidence did not justify the verdicts.

If you have fully recovered from your injuries and the other driver is clearly to blame, your claim should be worth double or triple the amount of your special damages.

Naturally it follows that if the injury is permanent, you should receive more—and if there is a question of liability you may receive less.

This rule is not applicable to every case. It does give you some-thing to go by, some basis for putting a dollar value on your claim.

Loss of earnings. Keep a record of your loss of wages or earnings. Get your employer to give you a letter stating the amount of your average earnings and the amount of time you lost as the result of the accident.

The fact that you are temporarily unemployed at the time of the injury does not necessarily mean that you may not recover lost earnings. You may establish your lost earnings by showing what you had earned in previous years. The basis for this claim is that you might have worked during the period of your disability.

Some difficult problems can be encountered in proving your loss of earnings. If in doubt as to what amount you are entitled to, consult your lawyer for his advice.

Loss of profits. You are not always allowed to collect loss of profits if you own a business. You are only entitled to recover the value of your services. If, however, your services, rather than invested capital or the services of others, are the biggest factor in your business, you can claim loss of profits. Example:
Frenchy, the barber, was laid up five weeks as the result of an automobile accident. He was proprietor of a ten-chair barber shop. During his disability, profits of the shop fell off $150 per week.

He could not collect more than $100 per week, which represented the value of his services. This is about what he would be paid as head barber in someone else’s shop.
Comment
If Frenchy, the barber, had no one working for him, had only a one-chair shop, then he could claim loss of profits.

Why is it then that you can’t fix the value of your own injury as well as some insurance adjuster? The answer is that you can.

Need for disinterested appraisal. If you use good common sense you can determine the value of your claim for bodily injury it just as well as an insurance adjuster. The only trouble is that is hard sometimes for us, as the poet, Robert Burns, said, “To see ourselves as others see us.”
Emotion and sentiment often cloud our thinking. Most of u frail humans lack sufficient objectivity to appraise our claims. They say that a doctor should never try to treat himself; also that a man who acts as his own lawyer has a fool for a client.

What would a jury say? If you had a lawsuit for personal injury, you would undoubtedly hear the judge say to the jury that they should bring in a verdict which “would adequately and fairly compensate” you for your injuries.

What wide discretion is given a jury! The jury may take into consideration a host of factors in a personal injury case. The jury might be told that in arriving at the amount of its verdict, it could take into consideration compensation for: your pain and suffering; your loss of time; your medical, hospital and nursing expenses; such permanent injury and disability as you will sustain in the future.

The chances are more than one thousand to one that you will never “go to a jury” asking for damages for your personal injuries. Nonetheless, the same factors which a jury would consider are those you should consider.

Special damages. Out-of-pocket expenses and loss of earnings are often referred to by claims adjusters and attorneys as “specials” or “special damages.” When you begin to evaluate your claim you should know the amount of these damages. They would include bills for:
Doctors
Diathermy and physiotherapy
Nurses
Household help
Hospital
Loss of earnings
X-ray
Transportation to and from doctor
Medicines
(and for other out-of-pocket expenses)

With regard to consumers, the question is what effect does a large or small involuntary market have on availability of direct auto insurance. The answer to this question really depends upon what one means by availability.

If availability is divorced from affordability and considered simply as a question of whether there is direct auto insurance available to the drivers in a given area, the evidence strongly suggests that for the lion’s share of drivers insurance is available in the voluntary market wherever insurers are not precluded from entering this market by government controls that prevent them from charging prices commensurate with risk. In any given state a certain percentage of drivers will represent non-standard risks.

There is no evidence that the free market, if not impeded, fails to offer insurance to these drivers. In Texas, for example, 17 percent of drivers obtain insurance in the non-standard market; in Wyoming, 19 percent; in Utah, 10 percent. These and a number of other states have infinitesimal numbers of drivers insured in the involuntary market. In other words, for all but an infinitesimal number of drivers, the private enterprise system is effective at making insurance available, on a competitive basis, at a price that reflects risk.

When the word “availability” is defined to mean “available at an affordable price,” then the issue is not availability, but affordability, which has already been discussed.

If “available” is defined to mean having the same amount and types of coverage available in the voluntary and involuntary market, then, clearly, in a number of states, insurance is not as available in the involuntary market as it is in the voluntary market. Some groups have charged that the involuntary market system is unfair from the point of view of drivers who must purchase their insurance there, because they cannot get the same coverage as in the voluntary market and because applicants have no choice of insurers and coverages. It has also been charged that the involuntary market is a device to permit redlining. Redlining refers to the notion that insurance companies refuse to write direct auto insurance in certain geographical areas. Such a practice is forbidden by the laws of all 50 states.

The involuntary market exists to ensure that at least basic insurance is available to drivers unable to obtain insurance in the voluntary market. However, there is no inherent reason why all the coverage available in the voluntary market cannot also be made available in the involuntary market. The only issue is how it will be paid for. If states provide a way for individual high risk drivers to finance the purchase of more coverage or a workable way for insurers to subsidize greater coverage, broader coverage then could be made available in the involuntary market. The reason it is not is that, for the most part, states have been unable to find an acceptable way to finance such direct auto insurance coverage.

States providing generous no-fault benefits also appear to better facilitate the rehabilitation of seriously injured accident victims than do those with traditional laws.

The reason is that since benefit payments are made more quickly in no-fault states, accident victims can afford to begin required rehabilitative treatment sooner after their accident, when treatment is likely to be most effective. (For example, the Automobile Club Insurance Association in Michigan, a major auto insurer in that state, recently had 623 cases of catastrophically injured victims on its books. Of these, only 15 were in nursing homes.)

Because no-fault has resulted in fewer lawsuits, taxpayers realize significant savings in court costs and other public legal costs. (According to former Chief Justice Warren Burger, every jury trial tort case costs taxpayers approximately $8,300 in court and other public costs.)

In sum, the report found that by every conceivable measure, those injured in auto accidents, are, on average, better cared for under strong no-fault laws and that taxpayers are also advantaged by such laws.

Find Direct Auto Insurance Online

In terms of value for their premium dollars, insurance buyers get the best deal from strong no-fault auto insurance laws that offer adequate first-party liability coverage and restrict lawsuits only to extremely serious situations involving catastrophic or near-catastrophic injuries. Start comparing direct auto insurance online. 

The public also benefits from laws that provide for verbal thresholds on lawsuits, since monetary thresholds with “dollar targets” tend to encourage accident victims to run up higher medical bills to qualify as lawsuit plaintiffs—which helps to drive up third- party liability premiums for everyone. In general, the insurance industry favors strengthening half-hearted laws—which have sometimes unfairly given the no-fault concept a bad name—to give no-fault auto insurance a chance to work. Where strong laws have been enacted, no-fault has achieved both strong protection for accident victims and the stabilization of auto insurance premiums. Find direct auto insurance online.

In spite of the strong opposition to no-fault auto insurance mounted by trial lawyers, soaring auto insurance premiums are causing a number of states to take another look at their liability insurance system. A recent poll of New Jersey motorists in American Automobile Association (AAA)-affiliated auto clubs revealed that nearly 70 percent favored adoption of a verbal threshold, while 77 percent viewed the auto insurance system in the state as a “very serious” problem, more serious even than crime.

A 1985 U.S. Department of Transportation study of no-fault auto insurance based on more than a dozen years of accident records in 24 jurisdictions, reached a number of conclusions indicating that those injured in traffic accidents are better off in states with strong no-fault laws.
The report said significantly more motor vehicle accident victims receive auto insurance compensation in no-fault states than in other states. Almost twice as many crash victims per 100 received personal injury benefits in states with no-fault laws than received compensation in traditional tort liability states. This was the case regardless of whether states had adopted the restricted lawsuit or add-on form of no-fault. Compare direct auto insurance quotes.

Compensation payments under no-fault insurance are made far more quickly than under traditional auto insurance, according to the report. (Most no-fault laws require insurers to pay victims within 30 to 60 days after they submit proof of their claims. By contrast, in tort states victims must wait months or even years for compensation.)

Get Direct Auto Insurance Quotes Online

The average amount of compensation available for payment to personal injury victims in no-fault states is greater than that in traditional liability states. No-fault states offer nearly double the amount of compensation than that offered in liability states. Find direct auto insurance quotes.

As for catastrophically injured victims, although typical auto insurance benefits in both no-fault and traditional liability states fall short of meeting all their financial needs, the report said, no-fault states come far closer to meeting these needs than do traditional states. In the first place, no-fault limits are typically higher than those of fault states.

Also, in liability states recovery is usually limited to the liability insurance limits of a policy, which can be as low as $10,000. In no-fault states, besides recovering first-party benefits, an injured person may receive benefits under the liability system when the no-fault limits for benefits have been reached. Get direct auto insurance quotes.

Since the 1970s, the primary thrust of opposition to no-fault auto insurance has come from trial lawyers. In 1976, the last year in which a state passed a no-fault law1, lawyers gave a quarter of a million dollars to Congressional candidates who opposed or were likely to oppose no-fault measures. Two years later, the Association of Trial Lawyers of America blocked a bill that would have set federal standards for state no-fault laws. More recently, as no-fault legislation has been debated in state legislatures, the opposition of lawyers has continued.

Unfortunately, opposition to no-fault auto insurance is an issue on which it is sometimes easy to manipulate public opinion. The idea of no-fault offends some people who think that it would mean a change to a system under which at-fault drivers would get off instead of paying for the damage they have caused. This is a simplistic view. Get direct auto insurance quotes.

To begin with, most accidents are not caused by reckless and irresponsible drivers. The average driver makes one driving mistake every two miles. The typical accident occurs when two drivers simultaneously make a simple mistake. The fault system devotes a lot of expense and time to determining fault in situations where common sense would indicate that neither driver was behaving irresponsibly. A no-fault system recognizes this fact of life of the automobile era and assigns the highest priority to seeing that the medical expenses of injured parties are promptly paid for. Find discount auto insurance rates online.

Irresponsible drivers, who flout traffic laws or drive while intoxicated, do not go free in no-fault auto insurance states. In so far as their actions are illegal, they are punished by the criminal justice system. Also if their actions cause serious injury, they can be sued in court. Further, no-fault laws typically allow for suits against drunk and reckless drivers, regardless of whether there is serious injury.

Compare Direct Auto Insurance Rates

If you are covered under No-Fault Auto Insurance, your insurance company will cover their damages no matter who is at fault.

A discussion of no-fault insurance would be incomplete without reference to the philosophical and social issues involved in decisions about how people are to be compensated as a result of auto accidents. Our fault-based liability system comes out of ancient English common law; it developed in America at a time when life was far less congested and technologically sophisticated, a time when it was often easier to make a clear decision about a persons being at fault or not at fault in an accident.

The system also was developed at a time when there was no liability insurance and when making those found negligent pay for the damage they caused actually imposed a financial penalty on those individuals and thus served to deter irresponsible actions. Today, this financial penalty has been greatly reduced; it is not the negligent individual who pays most of the cost of accidents, but all who share the risk through liability insurance.

Find Direct Car Insurance Online

Some penalty remains in the liability insurance system, because drivers who cause accidents typically are charged a higher rate. Given the congestion of our roads now (even rural areas have rush hours), the speeds at which automobiles travel, the role of bad roads and bad weather in many accidents, and the potential for car wrecks and injuries from relatively minor driving mistakes, there is a serious philosophical question as to whether a fault-based system—with its emphasis on individual fault—really reflects the reality of the majority of auto accidents. Compare direct car insurance rates now!

Furthermore, the tort liability system itself involves significant trade-offs. It is understood that the system is very slow, that much of the money expended does not reach the victims of accidents, that compensation is not guaranteed, and, on the other hand, that some victims may be greatly overcompensated.

These trade-offs are believed by some to be worth it to achieve the objective of identifying those who are negligent and making them pay. Increasingly, however, many question whether these trade-offs are worth it, particularly when, as the system is today configured, it is not actually the negligent parties who pay, but all insured drivers, and when no-fault may be the better alternative.

In deciding where they stand on the issue of no-fault, public policymakers and consumers need to consider the philosophical and social issues, including what the objective of the public policy should be (prompt, adequate compensation vs. making the guilty “pay,” for example), how much compensation is appropriate (clearly, some no- fault laws do not provide sufficient benefits to enable people to avoid bringing lawsuits, while some lawsuit plaintiffs can recover excessive amounts), and what is the most efficient and cost-effective means of achieving the social goals. Get direct car insurance online!

Most mutual companies, by state law, may issue non-assessable policies. Such policies can only be written by companies which have a sufficient surplus and the financial strength to meet the legal requirements for issuance of non-assessable policies. Get cheap direct car insurance quote!

Mutual companies which require the full premium in advance and issue non-assessable policies are, of course, to be distinguished from the old-fashioned type of “pure assessment mutual” company which was prevalent in the early days of insurance and still exists in the case of rural fire insurance companies.
Which is better to buy—stock or mutual insurance? There is no simple answer to this question. There are advantages to both types.

Choice of Insurance to Fit Needs – Stock or Mutual Insurance

Because of direct selling or lower commissions to agents and perhaps other factors, the selling costs of the mutuals are less than those of the stock companies. Several of the largest mutuals pay no commissions, but acquire their business through salaried salesmen. Through such differences in cost, mutual companies realize sums they are able to distribute as dividends to their policyholders. Find affordable direct car insurance quote!

To balance the item of lower net cost, the average stock company through its agent claims to give valuable service which many mutuals do not give. The few dollars you may save on premiums may be soon forgotten if your company does not give good service in adjusting claims, or if it will cancel your policy because of a few minor claims.

There are conservatives among both the mutual and stock companies who do not favor a public airing of the advantages and disadvantages of both types of insurance. Such conservatives urge harmony between the two factions of the insurance industry. They claim that controversies would be damaging to both classes of companies.

Such conservatives who shy away from argument on the subject place the emphasis on good reputation, reliability and financial standing of the company to be chosen. They say, “Ask your agent or broker. The average man wants a doctor when he is sick, a lawyer when he is sued and a broker or an agent when he has an insurance problem.” Get the lowest direct car insurance quote now by entering your zip code!

You never know when you might have a bad one—an accident that involves severe or numerous injuries. Should you have a serious accident, those limits of 5/10 would be inadequate. In fact, 10/20 limits would cover only a fraction of lawsuit demands. Compare direct car insurance quotes now!

True, few claimants collect more than $I0,000. True, few accidents involve settlements of more than $20,000. But! Thousands upon thousands are sued every year for amounts in excess of their policy limits. They never know whether they will be called upon to pay—until the case is finally disposed of. Some cases kick around in the courts for several years before they are finally decided.

When you buy liability insurance, get adequate limits when you request direct car insurance quotes. Read about some of the high jury verdicts in your daily newspaper; talk to your insurance representative to find out the exact cost of increased limits. Consult your pocketbook. Get bodily injury limits of at least $20,000 and $40,000 and property damage limits of $10,000.

Juries bring in high verdicts against those who, it appears, can afford to pay. Therefore, business and professional people, corporations and those with apparent wealth should carry higher bodily injury limits-perhaps $100,000 and $300,000.

Direct Car Insurance Quotes and Different Kinds of Insurance Companies

Organizations writing automobile insurance may be classified as follows:
1. Stock companies.
2. Mutual companies.
3. Reciprocal exchanges.
4. Lloyds associations.
For practical purposes, the average car owner need only choose between a stock company and a mutual. Most insurance men, in referring to a mutual, mean a national commercial company rather than a small county assessment mutual. Reciprocals and Lloyds associations form a relatively small portion of the total number of companies writing automobile insurance.

A stock company is organized for profit. The stockholders are the ones who are entitled to any gain that may result from the operation of the business. The capital funds of the corporation are provided by the stockholders in the purchase of shares of stock. The officers and directors of a stock company are elected by the stockholders.

The greater part of all automobile insurance in the United States is written by stock corporations.
In mutual companies, the policyholders take the place of stock-holders. The policyholders elect the directors or trustees, who in turn elect the officers and supervise the company’s business. In the case of a mutual company, profits belong to the policyholders. Get direct car insurance quotes!

A few years back it was necessary to insure separately against special hazards such as fire, theft, hail, flood and windstorm! Now all these hazards and more can be included in comprehensive coverage under any direct car insurance policy.

Comprehensive coverage is so all inclusive that it lists the types of claims excluded rather than those that are included. Under this coverage the insurance company agrees to pay for “loss of or damage to the automobile except that caused by collision or upset.”

Here is a list of some of the hazards that come under comprehensive coverage:

• Glass breakage (no matter how the glass breaks)

• Damage caused by missiles or falling objects

• Fire

• Theft

• Explosion

• Earthquake

• Windstorm

• Hail

• Water

• Flood

• Vandalism

• Riot

• Civil commotion

• Damage caused by children.

Just about any conceivable damage to the automobile is covered. If you have children, you probably appreciate some of the cute things they can do to a car. The damage they cause would be covered under “comprehensive.” For example:
1. In the gas tank they put sand, dirt, pebbles, or cement (even hoptoads).
2. On the upholstery they spill paint and ink, or cut it with knives.
3. They mar the finish with sticks or golf shoes.
4. They break the glass with baseballs or stones.

• Fire, lightning and transportation. Protection against these hazards is included in your comprehensive coverage. It can also be purchased separately. It protects you against accidental loss or damage to the automobile caused by fire or lightning, by smoke or smudge due to faulty heating equipment, or by the standing, sinking, burning, collision or derailment of any conveyance in or upon which the automobile is being transported on land or water.

• Theft coverage. This is included in comprehensive coverage, but it may be purchased separately along with fire insurance. It protects you against loss of or damage to the car caused by theft, larceny, robbery or pilferage.

You can rent another car if yours is stolen. The standard theft policy includes reimbursement for taxicab fares or car rental. You should report the theft to the police and your insurance company as soon as possible. The rental reimbursement period begins three days after you make the report and ends when the car is located or a settlement is made for the theft. It is limited to $5 per day or a total of $150.

The amount you receive for rental reimbursement is not deducted from the settlement of the theft loss.

Direct Car Insurance – Exclusions to Physical Damage Coverage

While “physical damage” coverage is indeed very broad, it does not include all losses or damage. Physical damage direct car insurance does not apply to:
1. Loss due to rebellion, insurrection, war or confiscation by government,
2. Damage caused by wear and tear, freezing, mechanical or electrical breakdown (unless such damage is the result of other loss covered by the policy).
3. Robes, wearing apparel and personal effects.
4. Loss due to conversion, embezzlement or secretion by any person in lawful possession of the automobile under a bailment lease, conditional sale, mortgage or other encumbrance.
5. Losses incurred while the car is used as a public or livery conveyance. (Participation in car pools is not considered use of car as a livery conveyance.)
6. Damage to tires, except damage caused by fire or theft, or unless such damage is coincident with other loss covered by the policy.
7. Losses which occur while the automobile is used in illicit trade or transportation.

Can you collect the amount deducted from your collision loss? When you settle your collision claim, you assign to your company all rights of recovery against anyone who caused damage to your car. Such assignment comes from what is known as the “subrogation” agreement in your policy. Get direct auto insurance quote today!

Subrogation means that the company steps into your shoes and has the right to collect damages from the “other fellow.” The assignment is made with the understanding that if your company recovers from the responsible party, you will receive a portion of the proceeds. Usually you receive that proportion which your deductible bears to the total amount of the loss.

Example
Mike rams the parked car of Sam. Mike says he has no liability insurance and no money to pay for the $200 damage. Sam wisely settles with his collision company. He has a $50 deductible policy and has to pay this amount himself. The company pays him $150.

Comment
Sam’s collision company will be subrogated to his rights. Suppose the company were to recover $100. Sam would be entitled to the portion of the $100 that his $50 bears to the total loss of $200- 50:200 — 25:100
He would get $25 of the $50 he paid out.

The insurance companies are entitled to deduct attorneys’ fees and other expenses incurred in effecting the recovery, before reimbursing the insured.

Direct Auto Insurance Quote with Convertible Collision

Collision insurance purchased in “convertible” form has no deductible—it is full direct auto insurance quote coverage. You pay about one-half the cost of a straight no-deductible policy. Upon the occurrence of the first loss for which payment is sought, the insured pays an additional premium, which is about the same amount as the initial charge.

Collision claims that are covered. Most claims involve the collision of two vehicles or one vehicle with a stationary object such as a pole or tree. Such claims present no coverage problem. They are clearly collision.
Some claims are not so easily defined. What would you say about this case? Someone fell from a high building and landed on top of a car. Was the resulting damage covered by collision insurance? An Appellate Court in Missouri decided that such an accident was a “collision.”

Many claims result from the oil pan beneath a car striking an object in the road. The oil drains out, but the motorist continues on his way. Result, the engine is scored. Where does the collision damage end? Is only the cost of repairs to the oil pan covered?

You will probably find some disagreement even among insurance adjusters on this problem.
Some adjusters might contend that the burning and scoring of the motor resulted from the motorist’s failure to protect his automobile from further damage after the collision. However, it is noteworthy that the courts of Pennsylvania and Texas have ruled that such claims should be paid under collision coverage.

The insuring company agrees to pay for direct and accidental loss of or damage to the automobile caused by collision of the automobile with another object or by upset of the automobile. Ready to compare direct auto insurance quotes?

The fact that you were to blame for an accident has no bearing. Collision coverage does not depend on negligence or liability. If your car is damaged by collision or upset, you can collect —even though you were to blame for the accident.

Suppose you can collect from the other fellow. If you have an accident with another car you may be able to collect from the other car owner or his insurance company.

Report the accident in any event to your collision company. If the settlement doesn’t pan out with the other fellow’s company, you can collect under your collision coverage. The reason that you should first try to recover from the other company is that you can ask for your full damages. Your collision policy in most instances contains a deductible clause.

You cannot make a settlement for your auto damage with the other car owner or his insurance company and then make a claim under your collision policy. he cost of collision insurance is geared to the list price and age of the car and the territory in which the car is used. Find direct auto insurance quotes now!

Why Buy Collision Coverage

“Full coverage” collision is about four times as expensive as $50 deductible. $25 deductible costs about one and one-half times as much as the $50 deductible, and about twice as much as the $100 deductible.
Many finance companies require that you carry $50 deductible —some will be satisfied with $100. Get direct auto insurance quotes from top carriers in your area!

Collision insurance can be purchased on an 80-20 basis. This form provides that the insured has to pay 20 per cent of the loss. The insurance company pays the other 80 per cent. The most that the insured has to pay on any one loss is fifty dollars.

Collision insurance on commercial vehicles such as tank trucks and buses is sometimes written with a deductible provision of $500 or more. Considering the value of these vehicles and the risk involved, the cost of collision insurance could be prohibitive without a substantial “deductible.”

The book price or value refers to the amount stated as the going price for used cars. These amounts are given in national used-car reports published for auto dealers, direct auto insurance companies, lending agencies, etc.
Some allowance must be made for cars in especially good or bad condition. But the book value is seldom very far out of line.

Stated amount limit.
Certain types of vehicles usually are not covered under the “actual cash value” form of insurance. Taxi- cabs, buses, police cars, snow plows and the like are covered by a “stated amount” limit.

A physical damage policy on a bus would state the maximum amount the insurance company would have to pay in the event of a total loss. In no case will the company pay more than the actual value of the bus.
There would be little reason for you to request the “stated amount” limit. The amount stated might be $2,000 and you would pay a premium based on this amount. Yet, should your car be destroyed, you could only collect up to its actual cash value—which might be considerably less than $2,000.

The only advantage to the stated amount limit is that you can insure a vehicle for less than its actual value. Thus, if you have a taxicab worth $5,000, you might consider insuring it up to $3,000 in order to reduce the cost of the insurance. Income-tax feature.

Find Direct Auto Insurance Fast

When your car is damaged by fire or collision or other casualty, and you don’t collect from direct auto insurance company, you are permitted to make an income-tax deduction for your loss. If you are in a high tax bracket, such a deduction would materially cut down your actual loss. The amount of the deduction which you would get for damage to your automobile would come out of the “top” tax dollar. Your tax bracket—high or low—is a factor to take into account when you consider buying physical damage insurance.

Tax rates vary from year to year. The practical effect of the income-tax deduction is that the United States government pays part of your loss if your income is substantial. If your top tax bracket is 50 per cent, in effect, the government would pay half of your auto damage loss; if you are in a 25 per cent bracket, the government would pay 25 per cent of your loss

Select your state or enter a zip code to get direct car insurance quote online. Persons injured “alighting” from the car. You would be considered alighting from the car while you were stepping from the car to the ground.

One court case went further. A woman got out of a car and was in the act of locking the door. She saw an oncoming car headed toward her. She ran behind her car and was injured.

The Court held that the woman did what any other reasonably prudent person would do—that she was injured while in the act of being upon and alighting from the car and, therefore, the claim should be paid.
Should you have a borderline case—one you are not sure is covered—present the claim to the insurance company. Most companies are fairly liberal in their interpretation of “medical payments” coverage.

Extended medical payments coverage. Something new is now available in medical payments insurance. You can purchase extended coverage. This would be in addition to your basic medical payments coverage and would cost about the same amount.

Extended medical payments covers you and all members of your family who are residents of your household: while riding in public vehicles such as a taxi or a bus, or while driving or riding in another person’s car.
It also protects you and the family if you or they are hit by a car while a pedestrian, and covers injuries to your children should they be struck by a car while riding a bicycle, roller skating or the like.

Get a Free Direct Car Insurance Quote Online

You cannot purchase “extended” coverage unless you already have the basic medical payments coverage. Therefore, if you have extended medical payments coverage with direct car insurance quote, it would mean that you and your family (residing in your household) would be entitled to benefits in the event any of you were:

1. Injured while in or upon, entering or alighting from any automobile.
2. Struck by any automobile while walking, riding a bicycle or a horse, playing or simply standing in the street.

Extended medical payments insurance is a good buy for car owners with children. You and your spouse are pretty well protected under basic medical payments insurance while using your own or any other car. This is not true as far as your children are concerned. In order to cover injuries to your children while they are riding in cars other than your own, it is necessary to purchase extended coverage.

They would not be covered under your basic medical payments insurance. Injuries to children in the streets are more common than is the case with adults. (Remember, however, that this coverage applies only to medical expenses. It has nothing at all to do with liability insurance.)

Another reason that extended coverage should be more attractive to automobile owners with children is that the cost of the insurance is the same regardless of the number of people in the family.

Extended medical payments insurance would be excess coverage over any basic medical payments benefits available under any other policy.

Example
Your young son is injured while riding in one of your neighbor’s cars. Your extended medical payments is SI,000. His medical expenses total $700. If your neighbor carried basic medical payments coverage, you would be entitled to collect from his company up to the limit of his policy.

Suppose, however, that your neighbor carried only $500. You would then be able to collect the first $500 of the medical expenses from his company; you could then turn the bills for the additional $200 over to your company and collect under your extended medical payments insurance. If your neighbor had no medical payments coverage, then you could collect the full $700 from your company.

You do not necessarily have to be in the car to collect under “medical payments.” The direct car insurance quotes and policy covers injuries caused by accident while in or upon, entering or alighting.

There is not much question about what “in” the car means. If you are driving or riding as a passenger, you are in the car. But when would you be considered “upon”? Just where does “entering” begin and “alighting” end? These are questions that even insurance officials disagree on. They have provoked many interesting court decisions.

Persons injured “upon” the car. If you are standing on the running board, seated on the fender, or jumping on the bumper, there is little doubt that you are upon the car. However, it is possible to give a much broader interpretation to upon.

Actual court case
A man heard a sound coming from the front of his car. He stopped to investigate. His bumper had fallen to the pavement and was hanging on one side. While tying up the bumper he was injured.

Decision
The Court held he was entitled to “medical payments” and said:
“Can it be said that the insurer attached to the words ‘upon’ a meaning so narrow as to encompass only such cases in which the entire weight of a person’s body was resting upon or supported by the vehicle?

Compare Direct Car Insurance Quotes Online

Considering the usual positions of a person in relation to a car in use and the fact that other enumerated risks include acts of being upon the automobile in the sense of resting upon or being supported by it, it is reasonable to give the term a broader meaning including some acts in which the person is in contact with the car.” Enter your zip code to compare direct car insurance quotes.

Persons injured “entering” the car. If you have one foot in the car or one foot on the running board—about to get in—few companies would argue that you were not entering. The coverage goes a little further than that, however. Chances are you would be considered entering once you came into physical contact with some part of the car and had the intention of getting in.

Actual court case
Several people had attended a wedding and started back to the automobile to return to their homes. All the car doors were locked. One plaintiff opened the front door with a key, leaned in to release the tab to the rear door; another was standing behind her holding the front door open; another had her hand on the handle of the rear door to open it as soon as the lock was released; and another was standing on or about the edge of the front door. All of them were struck by another automobile.

Decision
The Court said, “They had all completed their approach to the car, they were not coming up to it with the purpose of entering it, they had reached it, and they were actually engaged in the process of getting in.”
The Court held that the facts constituted “entering” within the meaning of the policy.

Expenses incurred within one year. The direct car insurance policy says you are entitled to “all reasonable expenses incurred within one year from the date of accident.” Insurance companies draw the line exactly one year from the date of the accident.

Most companies interpret “incurred within one year” to mean that the services or treatment must be rendered before the year is up. Your protest that Junior cannot have his teeth permanently capped for another two years may not be too successful, even if the dentist were to bill you in advance.

A case in Ohio, however, indicates that the courts may be liberal in their interpretation of the word “incurred”:
The insured sued to recover medical expenses of his wife. She was injured May 23, 2009. The doctor submitted his bill of $735 before May 23, 2010, although he was still treating the wife—and continued to do so after May 23, 2010.

The Court decided the insured should recover the entire $735. The jury found the medical expenses had been incurred within the one year period—even though the treatment had not been completely rendered within one year.

Can You Collect Twice For The Same Medical Bills?

Each person can collect up to the limit. The full amount of your direct car insurance coverage is available to everyone in the car. If the limit is $ 1,000, the injured in your car could collect up to $ 1,000 apiece. If five people were hurt, your company might have to pay up to $5,000—but, of course, no more than $1,000 for any one individual.

“Medical Payments” may be purchased with limits of $250, $500, $750, $1,000, $2,000, $3,000, $4,000 or $5,000.

Cost of Medical Payments

The cost hinges on the rate you pay for bodily injury liability coverage. It is not expensive, however. Ask your agent or broker for the exact figures. Here are the approximate rates:
For limits of $250 §500 $750 §1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 The approximate cost will be $5 $6 $7 $8 $9 $10 $11 $12

You can collect twice for the same medical bills. As stated previously, medical payments coverage has nothing to do with negligence or liability. It frequently happens that the injured in addition to his medical payments claim has a valid liability claim against the one who caused his injury.

He does not have to elect to make one claim or the other. He can collect under both the medical payments insurance and the liability claim. It’s startling but true—you can collect two or three times for the very same medical expenses under direct car insurance policy.

Example
Gillen carries medical payments on his car. He is struck from the rear when he stops for a red light. He is hospitalized and ends up with medical expenses totaling $350.
1.Gillen has “Blue Cross” protection and that takes care of $100 of the hospital charges.
2.He presents all the bills ($350) to his insurance company and collects for the entire amount under his medical payments.
3. Then he again presents the same bills to the liability insurance company on the car that caused the accident—and collects again.

You and your spouse can collect in cars other than your own. For all practical purposes, “medical payments” follows along with the liability coverage of your automobile policy—with respect to non-owned automobiles. If you or your spouse is injured in someone else’s car, you can still collect your medical expenses from your own company. Check out direct auto insurance quote online!

Example
Let’s assume you have “medical payments” on your car. You and your spouse are injured while passengers in the car of a neighbor, Frank Smith.

Comment
1.If neighbor Smith does not have “medical payments” on his car, you and your spouse can collect your medical expenses from your own insurance company.
2.If neighbor Smith does have “medical payments” on his car, you would collect first from his company. Should your claim exhaust the limit of his policy, you could then turn to your own company and collect.
Others can collect from your company even though the accident does not involve your car. If someone is injured through the operation or occupancy of another car by you or your spouse, he can collect his medical expenses from your company.

Get Direct Auto Insurance Quote in Minutes!

Getting direct auto insurance quote had never been easier! Enter your zip code to get started. The mere fact that you are a passenger in a car would not enable anyone in the car to collect. The injury must result from your presence in the car.

Example 1
Frank Smith suggests that you drive his car. The crash comes after you take the wheel. Smith is injured.

Comment
Assuming Smith had no “medical payments” on his car, he could collect from your company for his medical expenses.

Example 2
While Smith is getting into his car, you accidentally slam the door on his fingers.

Comment
He could collect his medical expenses from your company since the injury resulted from your occupancy. That is, he would not have been injured had you not been in the car.

Cases where medical payments coverage would not apply to another automobile. The “use of other car” feature of your insurance policy has its limitations.

Medical payments coverage does not apply:
I. Unless the injury arises out of the operation or occupancy of such other automobile by you or your spouse (or on behalf of either by your chauffeur or servant).
2. To other cars owned by you or members of your household.
3. To other cars frequently hired or used by you or members of your household.
4. To any vehicle (other than a private passenger automobile) used in your business.
5. To any public or livery conveyance, such as a taxi or bus. Medical expenses that are covered. Here are some of the common medical expenses that could be collected:

Hospital Physician
Dentist Ambulance
Professional Nurses
Physiotherapy Medicines (Drugs)
Bandages Funeral

In addition, most companies will pay for repairs to eye glasses, dental plates and artificial limbs if the damage is coincidental with a bodily injury. If your eye glasses or false teeth fall to the car floor and you are in no way injured, few, if any, companies will honor such a claim. Ready to get direct auto insurance quote?

What is “medical payments”? More than half of the automobile liability policies written include medical payments coverage. It is a part of the standard automobile liability policy. Find direct auto insurance quotes online now.

Its benefits are available only if you pay the additional cost for this protection. Except for liability insurance, it is probably the best insurance buy you can make in the automobile line. Here is the way it reads:

The company agrees “to pay all reasonable expenses incurred within one year from the date of accident for necessary medical, surgical, ambulance, hospital, professional, nursing and funeral services, to or for each person who sustains bodily injury, sickness or disease, caused by accident, while in or upon, entering or alighting from the automobile if the automobile is being used by the named insured or with his permission.”
You can collect even though negligent. Liability does not matter. This coverage has nothing to do with negligence or responsibility. Therefore, you can collect your medical expenses even though you were responsible for the accident.

Example
One morning you are late for work. Before you realize it, the speedometer shows sixty mph—a sharp curve looms up—off the road you go—smack into a telephone pole. Your leg is broken at the knee.

Comment
You were negligent and entirely to blame for the accident. Yet if you have “medical payments” you can collect your medical expenses.

Anyone can collect. The direct auto insurance quotes and policy covers “… each person who sustains bodily injury . . . caused by accident, while in or upon, entering or alighting from the automobile. . . Everyone is covered—you, your children, neighbors, even chance acquaintances—as long as the car is used with your permission.

When you or others cannot collect. “Medical payments” benefits are not payable:
1. To an employee of the insured, injured in the course of his employment (other than domestic).
2. To anyone entitled to Workmen’s Compensation benefits.

Example
Reynolds, a carpenter, runs out of nails. His boss says, “take my car and get another keg.” Reynolds takes along his wife and little boy. He has an accident. All three are injured.

Comment
Reynolds’ injuries would not come under his boss’s medical payments coverage. He was an employee of the insured and he was hurt while in the employment of the insured. The medical expenses of his wife and little boy, however, would be paid.

Enter your zip code to compare direct auto insurance quotes today!

Thirty days’ automatic coverage for newly acquired car. If you swap cars, your direct auto insurance coverage automatically shifts to the newly acquired car. However, you must notify your insurance company within thirty days. If you fail to give notice of the trade within the thirty days’ grace period, your company can deny you coverage in the event of an accident.

If you buy an additional car, it will be covered automatically, provided all other cars owned by you are insured with the same company. You must notify your company within thirty days and you have to pay any additional premium required because of the insurance on the newly acquired automobile.

Territorial limits. The standard policy applies only to accidents occurring in the United States, its territories and Canada. Before taking your car to Mexico or any other foreign country, you had better see your agent or broker.

No insurance while towing house trailer. Since the war, trailers have become popular. Many trailer owners would be without insurance protection if they had an accident while towing their “house on wheels.” In order to avoid such a situation, you must take out insurance on the trailer itself and the insurance must be with the same company that carries your car insurance.

How To Find Direct Auto Insurance Online

Utility trailers, such as are commonly used for hauling gravel or top soil, do not jeopardize your insurance. They can be used without your buying any additional coverage.

If there is any doubt about whether a trailer is a house trailer or a utility trailer, check with your insurance company.
Other policy exclusions. The policy does not apply:
1. To damage to property owned by, rented to, in charge of or transported by the insured. The theory is that you cannot sue yourself. While you are in charge of the property, it is just as though it were yours.
2. To injury to an employee of the insured while in the employ of the insured (other than in domestic employment).
3. To injury to an employee of the insured entitled to Workmen’s Compensation benefits.
4. To an obligation under any Workmen’s Compensation law.
5. Obligations assumed by the insured by contract or agreement.
6. While the automobile is used as a public or livery conveyance, such as a taxicab.

Find direct auto insurance now!