Vehicle Insurance in Texas

The insurance issue has been a thorny one for several years.. There seems to
be much disagreement about solutions to the problem.. One thing that
everyone seems to have in common, is that there is a problem.. This problem
will continue until the common desire to come to a solution is reached.. The
problem is political, since legislation is involved. The problem will
persist until the monetary influence is removed from the picture.. Many of
the lawyers in Texas, survive on the litigation profits.. Many of our
legislators are largely financed by the insurance company donations to their
campaigns.. Various proposals have been offered which would limit the market
share of the insurance companies and the lawyers subsistance, as well as the
donations to the politicians.. None of those entities will submissively
forfeit their incomes.. Under the existing provisions of the law, the entire
process is being financed by the consumers.. The suggestions offered include
the "pay at the pump", which has been proposed and rejected by the lawyers,
insurance companies and the legislators.. Most of their opposition has been
based on the extraordinary high cost of the gallon of gasolene, which of
course is eyed by the oil companies.. None have posed the issue of the
decrease in taxes that are imposed by the state and the federal government..
Many of the taxes included in the cost of gasolene are also taxable in other
areas such as property and school taxes, sales and estate taxes.. We are
talking about triple and quadruple taxation.. Considering the limitation of
the insurance company players in the market, and the number of vehicles
registered in this state, costs of the per gallon would rise only slightly..
The elimination of some of the state and federal taxes which would be
possible, just might marginalize any increase, whatsoever.. The only losses
would be to the insurance companies, the trial lawyers and the
politicians..Ever notice the bridge and highway tax that you pay when you
register your vehicle each year.. hmmmm.. Wonder if the oil company is taxed
for that item.. Their product is consumed on those highways and bridges..
The entire mechanism of insurance legislation needs to be scrutinized and
revised..So far.. we have been subjected to the notion that insurance
companies must be enabled by legislation to sustain massive profits.. Trial
lawyers must be provided with market share of litigation.. (have you tried
to hire a lawyer, lately).. As a result, we have seen the cost of premiums
rise continuosly since the mandate insurance legislation became law..It
isn't necessary to throw out the baby in the bath water.. The current system
is workable, but only if the insurance companies are mandated to provide
affordable coverage to all .. In the real world, the lawyers charge
prohibitive fees, if you could hire one for a borderline case.. Most won't
even touch a case that is questionable.. The insurance companies won't even
defend a case that is borderline.. It is usually settled without being
litigated, however, the lawyers get their cut and life is good.. Everyone
received their cut and the injured party pays the cost by increased premiums
or out of pocket.. Reasonable profit is fair and is to be expected, obscene
profit is what the reality becomes, in the current system..

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

I completely agree. However, I do believe that those of the
high risk variety should be assessed higher rates for their actions.

But, as I see it, they(high risk) are being charged higher premiums,
and so is everybody else, so the high risk just drop the coverage.



Gary

 

Actually Nurick.. I could care less what you pay for anythng..

Again.. pay your premiums and enjoy..

So .. if you are satisfied.. "What is YOUR problem"..

On the other hand.. I don't know that you have anything.. So again.. "what
is your problem"..

Good .. pay your insurance premiums and STFU..

Ah well.. some of the other "insurance company advocates" had sentiments
like yours until the bolt of lightning struck THEM.. Your qualifications for
analyzing any position, especially mine, is zero.. Albert .. you are a
foolish child..

 

The insurance issue has been a thorny one for several years.. There seems to

I am paying $625/year for my 99 Expedition and $650/year for
my wife's 97 Civic. I am also paying $2300/year for my 20 yr old
son's 2003 F150. These are all with $1000 deductible and full
coverage including uninsured motorists at Amica Insurance. Amica
is a mutual insurance company and rebates all profits back to us in
the form of dividends. I also am paying $220/yr liability and
uninsured motorist on my 2000 Nighthawk 750. My son is on there
also which caused it to go up by $91.

In 2002, my homeowner insurance was $1020. In 2003, it was
$2030. Same coverage. In 2004 it is $1600 with a mold exclusion.

It is the lawyer's fault. Period.

Thanks,
Lynn

 

How is it the lawyer's fault..?? Not that I have any affection for those
sorry sob's.. The insurance company is the ones who are sending you those
bills with the blessings of the political leadership in Austin..

 

Where you been anyway.. you lying ass phony ? What scrutiny..::??

 

Seems real simple from this end.. Nurick .. since you are so happy with
those high assed rates you pay ??? Then pay the sons a bitches and shut the
**** up.. You are nothing but a damn troll anyway.. What'd they do.. run
your wormy ass off "reeky"..?? LOL

 

I thought you were delighted with your rates, you lying bastard.. Now .. you
want to blame it on the lawyers.. Make up your silly assed mind, if you
can..

 

Bill.

LMAO. No.. ROTFLMAO... Juvenile.. Told you.. All anyone has to do is just
give you the rope.. You will take care of the rest..

 

Pay those rates and smile, Nurick..

You are an idiot.. I don't argue with idiots.. The profit margins are there
for anyone to take a look at..

How many different ways do I need to tell you to pay your insurance
premiums, if you have insurance.. Smile when you write the check.. You are
so funny..

 

I'd like to hear more about this new bike actually, but I'm not sure
what it is. It seems, or did I misunderstand, in some earlier post I
thought you(Albert) referred to it as an ST13. However, in your
sig, I see a '04 Yamaha.

Tell use/me what it is, and how you like it. Please.


Thanks - Gary

 

People have had the term driven into their heads so much that they
don't know what it means. They think it means "big award".

As with anything else (back to the music industry) we as consumers
have industries telling us what to think. It gets to the point that we
don't know right from wrong. First the industry tries to get new laws,
and when that doesn't work or when the law is against them, then they
change our ways of doing things by telling us their interpretations.
No place in the law of copyrights is there anything saying it's
stealing or copyright violations to download mp3s or "music" for that
matter. It does say it's unlawful to provide it to others (in
caveats). To ask 100 people today whether it's illegal to download
music or not, you'll get about 90% saying it is. Yet, on the other
turn, they also say it's okay to pay .99 cents per song for
downloading. It's crazy!

 

I did. I found a bunch of pro-consumer sites which claimed absurdly high

And, the spoiler in all this is Amica Insurance. Amica is a mutual,
all profits are returned to the insured in the means of dividends.
The house insurance dividend is 15% (if I remember right) and the
car insurance dividend is zero. Amica is very highly rated by
Consumer Reports mag (usually #1 or #2). Yet, Amica's rates
are squarely in the middle of the pack. No agents (they sell by
word of mouth - in fact you have to have someone recommend you)
and your claims are handled very professionally. I've been with them
for 20 years now and my Dad has been with them 30+ years. No
complaints other than they are picky who they insure.

However, Amica does not insure motorcycles.

Lynn

 

Thanks, that sounds great. I was also considering an ST13, but
wanted to broaden my options. I've been to the Yamaha site,
and seen the 1300. Honestly, it almost looks exactly like the Hon-
da 1300, but I'll review more carefully.

I, like you, am not too keen on this purchase criteria mentioned,
but I'm a long way from that right now.

Thanks for the information.

Gary

 

Please understand also that "dividends" in the insurance industry hold a
different definition that do dividends in the financial services (stock
market) industry.

Insurance companies lobbied to the gov't to define "their dividends" as
being "returned profits" - but that should really be understood as "return
of overpaid premiums".

Rex S.

 

And because the facts of the case are not public record we should be
careful about making any kind of judgements regarding the merits of
those cases.

I'm not sure I agree that the risk is minimal, but I get your point.
Problem is we also don't want the situation where it is impossible for
the non-wealthy to pursue justice through the courts.

Well, that's at least 3 of us. Maybe the three of us can hold up our
end?

Oma
Walk with many, follow The One.
(to email, change nospam to w000023)

 

I think we agree that abuses of systems occur. I don't see any
politically acceptable way to create a system that cannot be abused.
Yes, the abuse sucks, costs, and needs to be addressed.

A big part of the whole idea constituitional governments and systems
of laws is to protect the little guy, those more vulnerable. I'm not
ready to throw that out. In fact, I think the principal is in more
dire need of protection these days.

I appreciate it.

Oma
Walk with many, follow The One.
(to email, change nospam to w000023)

 

When integrity and honesty prevail, legislation is unnecessary.. Since
passage of the "Mandatory Insurance Bill".. there is no balance.. Our
legislators have mandated the consumers to provide insurance coverage..
There is NOT a mandate for the insurance companies to provide affordable
coverage .. Since the law was passed, we have seen the costs of insurance
premiums skyrocket .. This legislation should be revisited and amended to
level that playing field, rather than the blank check for thievery that has
been handed to the insurance companies.. The floors of the capitol in Austin
are filled with the lobbyists for the insurance companies and the checks
change hands every day that the legislature is in session.. These advocates
who are delighted with their insurance costs would truly be outraged if they
ever witnessed the outright bribery that occurs while those agents solicit
support for the bills favorable to the insurance industry.. Mandates should
be a double edged sword that makes the field level for industry as well as
the taxpayer and consumer..

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

I'm going to have to think about this one for a while.

Without regard to the MERIT of the idea, the idea of legislation that
significantly reigns in attorneys actually getting passed is . . . ,
well, it's . . . Well, I don't know WHAT it is besides being much like
a snowball in hell.

I appreciate it.

Oma
Walk with many, follow The One.
(to email, change nospam to w000023)

 

Yes, sir. And when we deal personally and responsibly with our
problems on a very local level, a lot of that bloated bureaucracy
shrinks.

I suspect a lot more folks would be outraged if they knew what is
actually happening in some of those places.

Oma
Walk with many, follow The One.
(to email, change nospam to w000023)