Wouldn’t that just mean the UM and UMPD loss ratios will rise? The accidents will still happen and injured parties will seek coverage somewhere. Plus, I don’t think that proving cell phone usage is the cause of an accident is foolproof.
“I don’t think that proving cell phone usage is the cause of an accident is foolproof.”
I agree 100%.
For just one example (as I’ve mentioned in other threads): my wife and I drive together all the time and, when I’m driving, I have her respond to texts from my phone from the passenger seat. If I got into a loss and someone checked the logs and saw “I” was texting, that’s a false positive and I couldn’t prove otherwise.
Cell phones do not help that’s for sure. But also to replace a bumper on a $18,000 Ford Focus costs $2,500 vs. $750 back before all these motion sensors. Sensors cannot be fixed; only replaced new due to liability issues with body shops. This is the driving factor. Also, vehicle ownership is a rating factor now due to all these very distracting “bells & whistles” even standard cars come with.
They had better get a handle on what to do with the cell addicts or their loss ratio will continue to deteriorate.
Simple. Just add another signature, stating no coverage if loss is due to cellphone use. Exclude, exclude, exclude.
Manuscript endorsements work for me on the exclusion, but the cell addicts sore losers would say it is not fair and sue.
Wouldn’t that just mean the UM and UMPD loss ratios will rise? The accidents will still happen and injured parties will seek coverage somewhere. Plus, I don’t think that proving cell phone usage is the cause of an accident is foolproof.
“I don’t think that proving cell phone usage is the cause of an accident is foolproof.”
I agree 100%.
For just one example (as I’ve mentioned in other threads): my wife and I drive together all the time and, when I’m driving, I have her respond to texts from my phone from the passenger seat. If I got into a loss and someone checked the logs and saw “I” was texting, that’s a false positive and I couldn’t prove otherwise.
So the company excludes the coverage and they cause an accident with another car, now that party’s insurance will have to pay?
How does that help !
Ever hear of subrogation actions against the cell addicts that cause an accident?
Cell phones do not help that’s for sure. But also to replace a bumper on a $18,000 Ford Focus costs $2,500 vs. $750 back before all these motion sensors. Sensors cannot be fixed; only replaced new due to liability issues with body shops. This is the driving factor. Also, vehicle ownership is a rating factor now due to all these very distracting “bells & whistles” even standard cars come with.