Seems like a gross disservice to the buyers of insurance. A cut down coverage most people buying a car don’t need. Get the state out of this kind of marketing. Do the proper job of policing those that do sell insurance and the people of the entire state, not just a political concentrate, will be better served.
Good luck with this one folks. Yet again, Garamendi uses his position as a campaign forum vs a true postion of change. He needs to look at the impact frivolous lawsuits are having on business insurance as well as the ridiculous construction defect claims on contractor liability. Do something worthwhile and stop catering to your “constituents” Garamendi.
I don’t understand how they can provide $10/20/3 coverage when state minimum required limit is $15/30/5. We should consider about E&O issue and it’s not worth spending 3 to 4hrs to earn $30. Beside, most of good drivers are already paying less then $400/yr anyway. This LCA program may look like helping consumers, but, this only lead commissioner one step closer to state capital
The solution to the problem is to make the mandatory 15/30/10 limits more affordable.
True, dui’s, dwi’s, drug influence, at fault accidents and multiple tickets deserve high rates, but the majority of my book of business is made up of people who are clean, but never had coverage before, or new drivers, etc., my loss ratio is under 15% on my substandard book to back up what I am saying. My preferred book has a loss ratio of 48%.
Why isn’t limits in keeping with the real risk. All drivers should carry a minimum of 100/300/50.
If not those limits, we then are subsidizing those who don’t or won’t.
The whole state needs to get into the real world.
Seems like a gross disservice to the buyers of insurance. A cut down coverage most people buying a car don’t need. Get the state out of this kind of marketing. Do the proper job of policing those that do sell insurance and the people of the entire state, not just a political concentrate, will be better served.
Good luck with this one folks. Yet again, Garamendi uses his position as a campaign forum vs a true postion of change. He needs to look at the impact frivolous lawsuits are having on business insurance as well as the ridiculous construction defect claims on contractor liability. Do something worthwhile and stop catering to your “constituents” Garamendi.
Side note – what is the loss ratio on that book?
I don’t understand how they can provide $10/20/3 coverage when state minimum required limit is $15/30/5. We should consider about E&O issue and it’s not worth spending 3 to 4hrs to earn $30. Beside, most of good drivers are already paying less then $400/yr anyway. This LCA program may look like helping consumers, but, this only lead commissioner one step closer to state capital
You’re right. How about the cancellation ratio?
The solution to the problem is to make the mandatory 15/30/10 limits more affordable.
True, dui’s, dwi’s, drug influence, at fault accidents and multiple tickets deserve high rates, but the majority of my book of business is made up of people who are clean, but never had coverage before, or new drivers, etc., my loss ratio is under 15% on my substandard book to back up what I am saying. My preferred book has a loss ratio of 48%.
Why isn’t limits in keeping with the real risk. All drivers should carry a minimum of 100/300/50.
If not those limits, we then are subsidizing those who don’t or won’t.
The whole state needs to get into the real world.