data.3news-bydate.test.rec.motorcycles.104390 Maven / Gradle / Ivy
From: [email protected] (Tommy Marcus McGuire)
Subject: Re: Should liability insurance be required?
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
Lines: 42
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: cash.cs.utexas.edu
In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Chris BeHanna) writes:
>In article [email protected] (Tom Coradeschi) writes:
>>In article <[email protected]>,
[...]
>>BZZZT! If it is the other driver's fault, your insurance co pays you, less
>>deductible, then recoups the total cost from the other guy/gal's company
>>(there's a fancy word for it, which escapes me right now), and pays you the
>>deductible. Or: you can go to the other guy/gal's company right off - just
>>takes longer to get your cash (as opposed to State Farm, who cut me a check
>>today, on the spot, for the damage to my wife's cage).
>
> The word is "subrogation." Seems to me, if you're willing to wait
>for the money from scumbag's insurance, that you save having to pay the
>deductible. However, if scumbag's insurance is Scum insurance, then you may
>have to pay the deductible to get your insurance co.'s pack of rabid, large-
>fanged lawyers to recover the damages from Scum insurance's lawyers.
>
> Sad, but true. Call it job security for lawyers.
>
>Later,
>--
>Chris BeHanna DoD# 114 1983 H-D FXWG Wide Glide - Jubilee's Red Lady
[...]
You know, it sounds suspiciously like no fault doesn't even do what it
was advertised as doing---getting the lawyers out of the loop.
Sigh. Another naive illusion down the toilet....
-----
Tommy McGuire
[email protected]
[email protected]
"...I will append an appropriate disclaimer to outgoing public information,
identifying it as personal and as independent of IBM...."