Posted On: January 8, 2007, 1:39 pm CST

Posted By: CJ

This is another way to broaden coverage to pay for losses that were never intended because the case is a real tear jerker. Every time something like this happens the only ones that profits is the trial lawyers who brings these cases and the ones that pay the price is the insured's who have to pay the increased premiums to cover situations that should not be included under the contract. The child in this case is an insured under the contract and should receive compensation ONLY under PIP coverages when the parents are at fault. This is what is intended under the contract and why responsible people, like myself, pay for the max PIP limits available from my carrier. This is the coverage that was intended to pay these losses. It's not fair that we all have to pay for uncovered losses by irresponsible insureds, greedy trial lawyers and sympathetic juries who feel that it is more important for the damaged party to receive money than it is to uphold a legal contract. People (I am not refering to most of the people that read thses journals) need to keep in mind that insurance companies don't pay for losses, insureds pay for losses through the premiums they pay.