Vehicle Insurance.. Again..

I think Bill is referring to liability, not full coverage which would
include stolen vehicle protection. Bill has a point and I have noticed this
for some time and complained about it but only to the insurance agent, not a
politician. If I add a 2nd or 3rd vehicle, liability only, the cost always
goes up even thought they claim I get a multicar discount. As long as you
add a vehicle to an existing policy that is as safe as the current vehicle,
there should be NO increase in premium. I can see a small fee just to handle
the paper work for the extra vehicles. Conceivable adding a safe 70k
mercedes could make no difference in liability if it shares milages with a
found-on-the-road-dead pickup. I have complained about this, especially
since i commute to work exclusively on my motorcycle, but I am rated as if I
drive the cage to work even thought I dont.

details

I propose changes that limit payouts. For example, if you are injured and
you or your passenger were not wearing a seat belt (helmet, etc whatever)
then you cannot collect insurance even if the accident was the fault of the
other driver. There would be no tickets for not wearing a seat belt, etc.
However, this might be hard to prove and might require some type of sensor
that can detect if the seat belt was engaged when the accident occured.
Some new vehicles have "black boxes" that record stuff like that anyway as I
recall reading.

 

Need to check with your friend again. The malpractice insurance companies
have asked for increases each year since the law took effect. Even Gov
Perry said after the law was in effect that he didn't expect prices to stop
increasing until after 5 years. Not what was promised.

However there is some good news, less lawsuits are being filed even tho
doctors are still paying increased malpractice insurance costs.

http://www.wfaa.com/s/dws/bus/stories/082304dnbushospitals.a8121.html

 

I believe he was referring to malpractice insurance that doctors and
hospitals pay, not premiums for health insurance by patents. It will take
some time to drop, maybe never if the cost of living goes up. I am not sure
where the 37% came from, I have seen a smaller figure in the San Antonio
News
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/texas/stories/MYSA082704.4B.perrymalpractice.212e8512.html
but clearly premiums payed by hospitals and dr's have dropped while your's
and mine health insurance has not and probably wont in the near future.

I didnt want to register to read this, can you quote anything?

 

Don't get me wrong, Bill. I'm not comfortable with the system as it
is. I just believe that if you are going to say something is wrong
or bad, you should offer a viable solution to a better way of doing
things.

So, in the interest of getting it changed I was just curious how you
(or anyone) felt about the above scenario. I'm sure the insurance
companies would throw it in our faces in a debate.


--Fullstate

Me and Mah 'Priller!

 

Thanks for the info, Elmer. That is why I asked. I don't believe
everything I hear (read).


--Fullstate

Me and Mah 'Priller!

 

I finally read that article. It turned out I had registered with the
DallasNews a long time ago and all those networks share a common database so
I used my old username/password from the DallasNews. The article was much
more informative than the San Antonio one but the basic info was the same,
the hospitals rates have dropped.

The SA article featured our guv perry showing up at the county hospital
for a photo shoot and bragging about helping pass proposition 12. However,
I cant blame them for picking the county hospital since they are always in
the red and would be the first receipents of the lawsuit cap spinoff. I was
not aware that any lawsuits filed previous to prop 12 passing are not under
the cap. That does not seem right and was cited for why the decrease in
premiums is only 9% this year and projected to be 17% next year. That also
means that trial lawyer scum will have another year or two before they have
to start watching their bottom line.

 

proposition 12 passed when Gov Goodhair convinced all the elderly that
the good doctors would go away without it.

Mike

 

Yep I was talking drs malpractice insurance also.

The article you referenced to shows that hospitals are saving 9% this year,
but it didn't mention doctors. In fact the article just sort of went on by
what drs are paying for malpractice insurance. However both articles say
the reason for the saving is the reduction in lawsuits rather than the
insurance going down in cost.

Mostly its the same as the article you provided except that it does go ahead
and mention the drs.
"Nearly a year after voters approved Proposition 12 to permit limits on
malpractice damages, insurance premiums for many doctors haven't gone down.
And many plaintiffs' attorneys say they can't afford to take injured
patients' cases because of the law's limit damages."

I've read elsewhere that the only org to reduce premiums was a doctors co-op
whereas the other companies immediately asked for an increase after the law
was passed.

 

Where have we heard all this before, and when.. Mandatory insurance
requirements for consumers.. Same song.. same dance and same results.. Same
lessons learned.. "always trust the integrity of the insurance companies and
the politicians that are owned by them."..

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

Some years back TMRA2 had an actuary work up the numbers when we
introduced a bill to put insurance on the driver instead of the vehicle.
He concluded that all vehicles could be covered for the state mandated
liability portion for $200.00 per individual. That 200 bucks times the
number of uninsured drivers would make up for revenues lost (to the
inscos) due to lowering the cost to the 200.00. This is based on the
premise that 200.00 is readily affordable to all in the population
group, and therefore all would be more likely to purchase it than not.
None of this precludes the availability of the extra coverages that are
currently available. I can dig up the bill we carried tomorrow and post
it for ya'll to chew on.

Mike Alvey

 

Thanks Mike.. I remembered that you told me about that Bill... We discussed
it briefly in the past few days.. If you could post it on this group, it
would be most helpful.. As you know.. I am not in sympathy with the
insurance companies who I feel have historically taken advantage of
consumers in our state.. Any creative alternatives that would at least level
the playing field to make this system more equitable for the consumer should
be examined while we have the opportunity to get committments from the
incumbents and candidates..

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

Well.. Well.. I got caught with my head in the bucket, again.. Just not
thinking..I don't recall what the percentages were, but that Bill did pass
at one of our "special" elections..

Perry slipped that one through, alright.. Much of the hype that was used to
mislead the voters were designed to make everyone think that costs for
malpractice insurance would be reduced drastically.. Thereby reducing
medical costs and save many of the doctors who were "fleeing" their
practices..

From what I am understanding, not one doctor has decided to keep practicing,
nor has the cost of his malpractice insurance been reduced..

Another prime example of our leadership in Austin misleading their
constituents.. Much like their tactics, as the insurance companies lobbied
for and successfully got the Mandatory insurance Bills passed, without a
provision for them to provide "affordable to all", coverages..

Since the strategy worked so well during the vehicle insurance deception,
the leadership in Austin, just repeated the "consumer savings" spiel to pass
this one.. Result.. Texas consumers pick up the tab again, to furthur ensure
insurance company profit..

If every motorcycle rider and advocate had mobilized against these deceptive
Bills, as they mobilized against the Helmet Laws, I'd bet, our insurance
costs would be fairer and more equitable, than we are experiencing..

Water under the bridge, and all that.. We have the opportunity to remedy
this situation, but the "window" is closing as we allow each week to pass..

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

Yeah, well I missed the boat on what actually happened. The articles
that were posted were interesting because as someone pointed out the
operating cost of the facilities went down slightly, it did not show
any decrease in the premiums paid to the insurance companies. I have
some friends that are doctors, PT's and OT's. I'll have to ask them
if they have noticed any difference.

--Fullstate

Me and Mah 'Priller!

 

I am not sure that we would not see the net result of the bill for
another year or so. I'm guessing that it is not going to reduce the
premiums paid, though it might keep them from rising at the same rate
after the bill has had time to reduce the payouts. We'll see. I,
like you, am not holding my breath, though.

However, I think a lot of people were mislead by this one and the docs
were leading the way. Some of my friends that are in the business
were vehemently fighting for the bill. We got into it a few times
until I point blank asked them what was to keep their premiums from
rising and was there any guarantee that they would drop? After the
blank stare the logic that followed was the same rhetoric we always
heard - if the payouts weren't as large then the rates would drop (but
of course, no guarantee).


--Fullstate

Me and Mah 'Priller!

 

I am still waiting for a suggestion or proposal from YOU.. The Driver's
Insurance is not my idea.. It is only an idea that was offered in
conversation and has been proposed in fact by TMRA II.. If you recall in my
initial post, I appealed for input and ideas.. Then I offered the Driver's
Insurance idea, with the understanding that it was not my idea.. at least
that was my intent..

Actually.. I would rather see legislation that penalizes the insurance
companies for their deceptions against the consumers of Texas..Rollbacks,
refunds and curbs against the profiteering at the expense of consumers would
get their attention quicker than reform..

One thing is for sure, inaction on the part of consumers, is the friend of
the insurance companies and the legislators they have bought.. Like I say, I
am open to any proposal that would level this unbalanced playing field..

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

Something tells me that there is a fat chance that this would happen.
I think that the best we could hope for with regards to legislation is
the reduction or cessation of increasing premiums without due cause
and process.

Well this is definitely one of those scenarios where I don't have all
the answers - yes, I know it's rare. LOL

It's good to bounce ideas off of each other as a group, though. I
like the idea of individual insurance, I just don't have it all worked
out. It seems like the TMRA 2 went to great trouble to work the
numbers and logistics out and they probably have a pretty good model
to propose.


--Fullstate

Me and Mah 'Priller!

 

Mike Alvey wrote:
.......snip

Elmer McKeegan has a TMRA2 chapter meeting this evening. I'll have to
dig up the bill tomorrow....well, maybe later tonite.

Mike

 

Hot damn... Sure glad to hear you are gonna be amongst us, Michael.. See ya'
later..

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

Look here.. for 1999

http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/tlo/76r/billtext/HB00476I.HTM

here for 1997

http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/tlo/75r/billtext/HB00366I.HTM

 

Thanks Elmer. Well here ya go ya'll. Now Jail Cell, I know ya just hate
to check out links but this one is real easy so go ahead and give it a read.

Mike Alvey