By the way, ‘defective vehicles’, are rarely (less than 2%) the main cause of vehicular accident deaths; try ‘defective drivers’. The driver has some fault in 90% of fatal accidents.
If you take 2% of 43,313 deaths (2008), 2% is 866 deaths. GM and Chrysler, based market share, could only be linked to 400 or so.
the article is silent to the fact GM and Chrysler both have existing paid products liability polices that will still be triggered in the event of a product claim. The bankrupt companies will continue to exist w/ an agent for service along side the new reformed companies, even if the former companies no longer produce anything or have a cash flow. The can be sued, and the suit tendered to the agent for service. Further, for occurences after the existing policies run out, the ongoing entities have the obligation for recalls of existing fleets, so in many case one could sue for negligence in ongoing operations vs. product liability, i.e. they should have issued a recall vs. actual product based claims…
this assumes that every claim made is legitimate and will be paid. we should all realize the majority (?) of these types of claims are totally without merit. is every civil suit filed by a bottom feeding attorney legitimate? hardly. same percentages apply to these “claims”.
WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE TELL THIS TO OUR UNDERWRITING MANAGEMENT TEAM? They seem to think that all future products claims will now fall upon the dealer. We are now thinking about non-renewing all of the GM and Chrysler dealers that we currently write.
Luckily most of the IJ readers are smarter than to believe everything they read. All auto makers have occational safety issues. Let’s not predict something that may not be true. Rumors tend to be hurtful.
I thought that was the point of the Guarantee funds to cover liability in bankrupt groups…. or is it because they are self-insured and did not pay into it?
I find it ironic that Chevy’s motto used to be “the heartbeat of america”, yet they now say people will die from their defective products. (part of GM at least) LOL!
I would imagine the GM and Chrysler are, in fact, self-insured for product liability. However, if they are using component parts from other suppliers, those suppliers may buy insurance. Generally they would have been held harmless, but, in light of the bankruptcies, this may change those contractual arrangements.
That probably has more to do with the financial viability of the dealerships being in question. We are closely watching any and all of our risks who have GM or Chrysler brands to make certain they are paying us.
How is it that we’ve come to believe that we are SOL if injured by a product whose manufacturer is no longer in business? Back in the old days we relied on first party coverage such taking out as life, disability, auto, homeowner and health insurance in order to protect us from the unfortunate events in life. And guess what? – there is no 30% contingency fee taken out of the proceeds.
So, what make of car does Mr. Sean Kane drive?
It seems to me that the watchdog groups revenue flow is being eliminated and are concerned of being taken out of the food chain.
I wonder who is funding this effort?
By the way, ‘defective vehicles’, are rarely (less than 2%) the main cause of vehicular accident deaths; try ‘defective drivers’. The driver has some fault in 90% of fatal accidents.
If you take 2% of 43,313 deaths (2008), 2% is 866 deaths. GM and Chrysler, based market share, could only be linked to 400 or so.
I wonder about their numbers….
Most accidents are caused by the nut holding the wheel.
the article is silent to the fact GM and Chrysler both have existing paid products liability polices that will still be triggered in the event of a product claim. The bankrupt companies will continue to exist w/ an agent for service along side the new reformed companies, even if the former companies no longer produce anything or have a cash flow. The can be sued, and the suit tendered to the agent for service. Further, for occurences after the existing policies run out, the ongoing entities have the obligation for recalls of existing fleets, so in many case one could sue for negligence in ongoing operations vs. product liability, i.e. they should have issued a recall vs. actual product based claims…
A lot of people dont even know that this group was actually started by Toyota. Makes you wonder….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0
this assumes that every claim made is legitimate and will be paid. we should all realize the majority (?) of these types of claims are totally without merit. is every civil suit filed by a bottom feeding attorney legitimate? hardly. same percentages apply to these “claims”.
WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE TELL THIS TO OUR UNDERWRITING MANAGEMENT TEAM? They seem to think that all future products claims will now fall upon the dealer. We are now thinking about non-renewing all of the GM and Chrysler dealers that we currently write.
Luckily most of the IJ readers are smarter than to believe everything they read. All auto makers have occational safety issues. Let’s not predict something that may not be true. Rumors tend to be hurtful.
I thought that was the point of the Guarantee funds to cover liability in bankrupt groups…. or is it because they are self-insured and did not pay into it?
I find it ironic that Chevy’s motto used to be “the heartbeat of america”, yet they now say people will die from their defective products. (part of GM at least) LOL!
WHAT? The State Guarantee Funds handle claims of financially insufficient INSURERS. NOT automakers????
How long have you been selling insurance?
I would imagine the GM and Chrysler are, in fact, self-insured for product liability. However, if they are using component parts from other suppliers, those suppliers may buy insurance. Generally they would have been held harmless, but, in light of the bankruptcies, this may change those contractual arrangements.
That probably has more to do with the financial viability of the dealerships being in question. We are closely watching any and all of our risks who have GM or Chrysler brands to make certain they are paying us.
How is it that we’ve come to believe that we are SOL if injured by a product whose manufacturer is no longer in business? Back in the old days we relied on first party coverage such taking out as life, disability, auto, homeowner and health insurance in order to protect us from the unfortunate events in life. And guess what? – there is no 30% contingency fee taken out of the proceeds.
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.