With that logic, CA would have to raise its minimum 15/30/5 personal auto limits to adjust for inflation (they haven’t been changed since 1964), and would then also have to adjust them for inflation annually, as well. I would like to see the CA Legislature raise them above 15.30.5, however, since they haven’t been changed in 50 years. While 15/30/5 may have been adequate in 1964 dollars, they’re obviously inadequate limits in 2014 dollars. Come on, CA Legislature. Come on, CA Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones. Come on, CA personal auto insurance carriers. Come on, CA consumer groups. Come on, CA trial attorneys. Come on, CA lobbyists. Come on, CA medical providers. Wake up! 15/30/5 limits simply turn an uninsured motorist problem into an underinsured motorist problem, instead.
Big lobbies on both sides of the issue in what appears to be a nearly even split amongst legislatures. Although I generally detest government intervention and over-regulation, this appears to be an idea whose time has come. Both for commercial truckers and personal Auto. 15/30/5 is a joke. Even a fender bender today easily can cost over $5,000 to fix, let alone a total. And a bodily injury limit of only $15,000? That doesn’t even pay for one day at the hospital. But the lobby against raising personal liability limits is even bigger.
Dave, I thought when Texas went from 20/40/15 PAP limits to 30/60/25 was pretty paltry for an increase. California, our most Progressive state is a total joke on their limit requirement. I bet they don’t have many claims that are totally paid out there. Everything has to be either U/M or UIM. What a nightmare for adjustors in that environment.
Are you calling for increased regulations? I would think you would be against any government mandates, yet alone increases in such mandates. Oh wait…these increases in limits increases the premiums your clients are charged and therefore your commissions. I guess when it benefits you personally, government mandates are perfectly fine.
Commissions aside, I personally think that 30/60/25 is probably the bare minimum needed, and push clients to obtain 50/100/50 or higher. Where I live (North Carolina), that is approximately a $30 to $40 increase. Yay… I earned $3.75 to $5.00, but have provided my insured with an increase on their coverage of 20/40/25.
Ok… example of minimum limits: Driver falls asleep, veers across roadway taking out $5,000 street light, hits building, streetlight flies off top of car in to adjacent building… 5 claimants with damages in excess of $50,000. Coverage $5,000 so who really pays? The property carriers for the buildings and businesses in the buildings and the taxpayers for the streetlight.
June 13, 2014 at 3:22 pm
CTC says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I write primary and excess truck. There’s not much difference in price between a 750k and a 1mm limit. It certainly wouldn’t put anyone out of business unless they are already on their way out of business due to other factors.
I agree. On a small fleet, there is generally not much difference in premium from the 750K to 1mil. On a large fleet, pretty soon you are talking significant dollars.
When you consider each truck as a separate profit center, it does not matter how many trucks are in the fleet.
In other words, it is the increase in premium for each truck compared to the revenue generated by each truck that matters when determining what is the true impact of increased premiums on profits.
With that logic, CA would have to raise its minimum 15/30/5 personal auto limits to adjust for inflation (they haven’t been changed since 1964), and would then also have to adjust them for inflation annually, as well. I would like to see the CA Legislature raise them above 15.30.5, however, since they haven’t been changed in 50 years. While 15/30/5 may have been adequate in 1964 dollars, they’re obviously inadequate limits in 2014 dollars. Come on, CA Legislature. Come on, CA Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones. Come on, CA personal auto insurance carriers. Come on, CA consumer groups. Come on, CA trial attorneys. Come on, CA lobbyists. Come on, CA medical providers. Wake up! 15/30/5 limits simply turn an uninsured motorist problem into an underinsured motorist problem, instead.
In the meantime – they have rolled out 10/20/3 — Does not put a dent in a claim
Big lobbies on both sides of the issue in what appears to be a nearly even split amongst legislatures. Although I generally detest government intervention and over-regulation, this appears to be an idea whose time has come. Both for commercial truckers and personal Auto. 15/30/5 is a joke. Even a fender bender today easily can cost over $5,000 to fix, let alone a total. And a bodily injury limit of only $15,000? That doesn’t even pay for one day at the hospital. But the lobby against raising personal liability limits is even bigger.
Dave, I thought when Texas went from 20/40/15 PAP limits to 30/60/25 was pretty paltry for an increase. California, our most Progressive state is a total joke on their limit requirement. I bet they don’t have many claims that are totally paid out there. Everything has to be either U/M or UIM. What a nightmare for adjustors in that environment.
Agent,
Are you calling for increased regulations? I would think you would be against any government mandates, yet alone increases in such mandates. Oh wait…these increases in limits increases the premiums your clients are charged and therefore your commissions. I guess when it benefits you personally, government mandates are perfectly fine.
Commissions aside, I personally think that 30/60/25 is probably the bare minimum needed, and push clients to obtain 50/100/50 or higher. Where I live (North Carolina), that is approximately a $30 to $40 increase. Yay… I earned $3.75 to $5.00, but have provided my insured with an increase on their coverage of 20/40/25.
Excellent point Ron! Nail meet head. Funny how opinions change when their own personal interests are involved.
Ok… example of minimum limits: Driver falls asleep, veers across roadway taking out $5,000 street light, hits building, streetlight flies off top of car in to adjacent building… 5 claimants with damages in excess of $50,000. Coverage $5,000 so who really pays? The property carriers for the buildings and businesses in the buildings and the taxpayers for the streetlight.
I write primary and excess truck. There’s not much difference in price between a 750k and a 1mm limit. It certainly wouldn’t put anyone out of business unless they are already on their way out of business due to other factors.
I agree. On a small fleet, there is generally not much difference in premium from the 750K to 1mil. On a large fleet, pretty soon you are talking significant dollars.
Agent,
When you consider each truck as a separate profit center, it does not matter how many trucks are in the fleet.
In other words, it is the increase in premium for each truck compared to the revenue generated by each truck that matters when determining what is the true impact of increased premiums on profits.
Exactly! A 2% increase is a 2% increase, regardless of the size of the fleet.