I am all for compensating victims fairly. But 1.4% of these claims exceed current levels. Clearly we should for 98.6% to pay for the 1.4%. This cost will be passed along to all of society in increased transportation costs. Using the same logic, the largest homeowners liability claims could be $5,000,000. We should therefore, mandate that all homeowners must carry $5,000,000. What a gold mine for the insurance carriers!
I’m generally against government intervention, but when I regularly see trucking claims in the 2MM, 3MM, 4MM and 5MM area it makes it looks silly that many are required to carry only $750,000. And as far as what we should require people to carry for personal insurance (if any requirements should be made besides state financial standards for Autos) I personally carry a 3MM umbrella on top of my homeowners and personal Auto policies. Requiring all truckers to carry 5MM does not seem out of line especially when one sees some of the carnage on our highways. If that means I have to pay more for shipping, I guess I would.
Dave, is there a disconnect when Personal Auto limits minimums are so low? $30/60/25 in Texas and some states have lower minimums than that. I know trucks are bigger and can cause more damage and injury, but Personal Auto limits are a joke. The GEICO crowd just loves those limits.
Personal liability limits requirements are a joke and always have been, obviously a political thing. Just because somebody is too poor to afford higher liability limits to protect the masses from their misdeeds, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be required to carry higher limits. If they can’t afford the higher limits, they probably can’t afford the vehicle and shouldn’t have one. Better to take public transportation or carpool. A poor person can cause just as much havoc in an accident as a better off person.
Dave, in our area, 6 out of 10 accidents reported to us by insureds who were hit by the at fault party involved Uninsured or Underinsured drivers. I had first hand knowledge since I was hit by a running the red light driver with no license, no insurance, totaled my new car and sent myself and wife to the hospital. Total cost $80,000, all paid by U/M. No subrogation possible since they guy left the area never to be seen again. These people are all over the place even though Texas has compulsory liability coverage. They get one of those month to month policies to get license and inspection, let it drop and run around 10 months of the year without coverage.
It makes sense to bump the limits as its been so many years since the limits were established.
If you kick the $750,000 limit to $1MM represents an increase of 1/3. Raise the other limits by the same percentage-that seems reasonable
I am surprised at the conversation here. As an insurance publication, I would expect a broader sense of what liability coverage protects to be the course of the discussion.
Liability does not end when your insurance limit is reached, liability doesn’t even end when your assets are exhausted.
Liability insurance protects the assets of the purchaser and the greater the assets, the higher the limits required to protect them. The company, with the advice of their risk management professional, needs to balance their exposure with the transferred and retained risk and the cost of the risk transfer.
This is all Insurance 101 stuff, I think the disconnect is that some politicians have convinced a small segment of the public (and themselves) that liability insurance protects someone other than the insured. Forcing the purchase of insurance because of what a potential claim could be is a ridiculous notion. If your insured needs more protection because they haven’t raised their insurance limits in 20 years, what are you doing as their agent?
The little guys don’t care if they cause a big accident. They just “go out of business” and the following week they set up shop with a new company name, same phone number, same VIN numbers on their units, same driver names. They’re skimping on maintenance of their own trucks; of course they don’t want to buy any more insurance than they have to. In this modern economy where everything is interconnected, carrying adequate insurance is a part of simple good citizenship. We should require truckers to carry insurance adequate to cover 99.9% of accidents. We should also be enforcing hours-of-service standards more, and minimum-maintenance standards. If a truck’s brakes catch fire and someone dies as a result, that death is preventable. End of story.
Again, I generally don’t care for to much government intervention. Although I support as general increase in required limits for truckers, limits which cover 99.9% of all cases seems like a bit much. Requiring all truckers to carry $5,000,000 and haulers of hazardous goods something like $10,000,000-$15,000,000 seems reasonable. Also no problem enforcing hours of service standards and maintenance standards seems to make sense.
To consider….. Our great country is moved by great trucking companies. The majority of trucking companies moving this country is your small trucking companies. Most small trucking companies could not sustain a rate increase of this magnitude UNLESS they were able to obtain higher rates from the shipper. Which in turn will be passed down to the consumer. Also, it will take a HUGE amount of trucks out of the market allowing the larger trucking companies with capacity pick up those loads. If that happens, rates for shipments will for sure increase which again will be trickled to the consumer.
How interesting the fact Todd Spencer failed to mentioned OOIDA owns a Risk retention group ( a non-regulated insurance company ). I wonder what are their hidden motives.
Given that the minimum limits have been that way for more than 20 years, and the value of $750k is not what it used to be, this is a good idea, IMO
I am all for compensating victims fairly. But 1.4% of these claims exceed current levels. Clearly we should for 98.6% to pay for the 1.4%. This cost will be passed along to all of society in increased transportation costs. Using the same logic, the largest homeowners liability claims could be $5,000,000. We should therefore, mandate that all homeowners must carry $5,000,000. What a gold mine for the insurance carriers!
It could be a bigger gold mine for plaintiff’s attorneys who will sue for millions when they know the limits are there for the taking.
I’m generally against government intervention, but when I regularly see trucking claims in the 2MM, 3MM, 4MM and 5MM area it makes it looks silly that many are required to carry only $750,000. And as far as what we should require people to carry for personal insurance (if any requirements should be made besides state financial standards for Autos) I personally carry a 3MM umbrella on top of my homeowners and personal Auto policies. Requiring all truckers to carry 5MM does not seem out of line especially when one sees some of the carnage on our highways. If that means I have to pay more for shipping, I guess I would.
Dave, is there a disconnect when Personal Auto limits minimums are so low? $30/60/25 in Texas and some states have lower minimums than that. I know trucks are bigger and can cause more damage and injury, but Personal Auto limits are a joke. The GEICO crowd just loves those limits.
Personal liability limits requirements are a joke and always have been, obviously a political thing. Just because somebody is too poor to afford higher liability limits to protect the masses from their misdeeds, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be required to carry higher limits. If they can’t afford the higher limits, they probably can’t afford the vehicle and shouldn’t have one. Better to take public transportation or carpool. A poor person can cause just as much havoc in an accident as a better off person.
Dave, in our area, 6 out of 10 accidents reported to us by insureds who were hit by the at fault party involved Uninsured or Underinsured drivers. I had first hand knowledge since I was hit by a running the red light driver with no license, no insurance, totaled my new car and sent myself and wife to the hospital. Total cost $80,000, all paid by U/M. No subrogation possible since they guy left the area never to be seen again. These people are all over the place even though Texas has compulsory liability coverage. They get one of those month to month policies to get license and inspection, let it drop and run around 10 months of the year without coverage.
It makes sense to bump the limits as its been so many years since the limits were established.
If you kick the $750,000 limit to $1MM represents an increase of 1/3. Raise the other limits by the same percentage-that seems reasonable
The limits are too low for good drivers and there are a lot of good truck drivers on the road, but enough bad ones that we need much higher limits.
I am surprised at the conversation here. As an insurance publication, I would expect a broader sense of what liability coverage protects to be the course of the discussion.
Liability does not end when your insurance limit is reached, liability doesn’t even end when your assets are exhausted.
Liability insurance protects the assets of the purchaser and the greater the assets, the higher the limits required to protect them. The company, with the advice of their risk management professional, needs to balance their exposure with the transferred and retained risk and the cost of the risk transfer.
This is all Insurance 101 stuff, I think the disconnect is that some politicians have convinced a small segment of the public (and themselves) that liability insurance protects someone other than the insured. Forcing the purchase of insurance because of what a potential claim could be is a ridiculous notion. If your insured needs more protection because they haven’t raised their insurance limits in 20 years, what are you doing as their agent?
The little guys don’t care if they cause a big accident. They just “go out of business” and the following week they set up shop with a new company name, same phone number, same VIN numbers on their units, same driver names. They’re skimping on maintenance of their own trucks; of course they don’t want to buy any more insurance than they have to. In this modern economy where everything is interconnected, carrying adequate insurance is a part of simple good citizenship. We should require truckers to carry insurance adequate to cover 99.9% of accidents. We should also be enforcing hours-of-service standards more, and minimum-maintenance standards. If a truck’s brakes catch fire and someone dies as a result, that death is preventable. End of story.
Again, I generally don’t care for to much government intervention. Although I support as general increase in required limits for truckers, limits which cover 99.9% of all cases seems like a bit much. Requiring all truckers to carry $5,000,000 and haulers of hazardous goods something like $10,000,000-$15,000,000 seems reasonable. Also no problem enforcing hours of service standards and maintenance standards seems to make sense.
Well, expect the cost of goods and services to go up. You know who will be paying for these increased limits!
To consider….. Our great country is moved by great trucking companies. The majority of trucking companies moving this country is your small trucking companies. Most small trucking companies could not sustain a rate increase of this magnitude UNLESS they were able to obtain higher rates from the shipper. Which in turn will be passed down to the consumer. Also, it will take a HUGE amount of trucks out of the market allowing the larger trucking companies with capacity pick up those loads. If that happens, rates for shipments will for sure increase which again will be trickled to the consumer.
How interesting the fact Todd Spencer failed to mentioned OOIDA owns a Risk retention group ( a non-regulated insurance company ). I wonder what are their hidden motives.
Charge it back to the broker & shipper as % cost of doing business.