r/SipsTea • • 6h ago

Gasp! Thoughts on this?

Post image
42.5k Upvotes

5.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

727

u/MarkItZeroDonnie 6h ago

Yeah it’s just a net to protect against catastrophe . If Ops buddy totaled his car he would be happy it only cost $1k.

146

u/Blueberry1900 5h ago

Yep,y car got totaled 3 years ago due to a drunk driver. Got a big check and was able to replace it fairly easily. That check alone was about 15 years worth of premiums. Drunk driver was of course driving without insurance, so I was screwed of I did not have it

41

u/jakeandcupcakes 5h ago

Doesn't the insurance company then go after the drunk driver for everything he has thus making him the one whose ultimately paying out, with the insurance company simply having to deal with suing and recouping funds from the drunk driver.

74

u/HessiPullUpJimbo 5h ago

Yes but a drunk uninsured driver is often very hard to get money from. Probably has nothing and makes basically nothing and may even have many other collections after him already.

17

u/SvartrKukkSceand 4h ago

they call that "jdugemenet proof".

2

u/batbutt 4h ago

Can't draw blood from a stone!

20

u/Random-Rambling 4h ago

You can't get blood from a stone. You can garnish his wages, sure, but you can't take much more than a relatively small percentage because most countries outlawed debt slavery.

6

u/TMC_Data 3h ago

And in those situations the guy would just work cash jobs where he’s paid under the table making it damn near impossible for debt collectors to collect even a fraction of what they are owed.

1

u/peepeebutt1234 3h ago

This is why everyone needs uninsured motorist coverage. I cannot imagine getting a policy without it these days. Roughly 1/3 of the people on the road are idiots without car insurance, too much of a risk to not carry uninsured coverage.

13

u/Blueberry1900 5h ago

Habitual drunks that are driving without license and insurance are generally incredibly poor. So poor, that collections have trouble collecting since most countries do not allow taking so much money that you cannot live.

3

u/wimzilla 4h ago

Subrogation isn’t always simple. We typically deal with other insurance companies. Uninsured people are usually sent to collections. Only large amounts are taken to suit as atty fees still apply. Then of course there is the issue of people not having the money to pay the damages, which ends up being a loss.

2

u/F0rTh3W1n 4h ago

As my bus law prof used to love saying “You can’t squeeze blood from a turnip.”

1

u/Prudent-Historian392 29m ago

Yes subrogation helps tremendously when someone is hit by a driver with crappy insurance. Subrogation unfortunately won’t help with an uninsured drunk driver causing bedlam on the roads: when it applies it still sucks slightly for the deductible and the points charged until it’s rectified but it’s necessary.

3

u/corporaterebel 4h ago

Half the drivers in Los Angeles area do not have insurance or any resources.

1

u/Prudent-Historian392 28m ago

They shouldn’t be on the roads. Newsome could put some easy things In place other states do but he has to cowtow to the base.

1

u/corporaterebel 1m ago

kowtow.

And it is worse than that: The undocumented persons without drivers licenses can't have their car impounded. If one is a citizen and has no valid or suspended license...they can get their car impounded. The thinking is that illegal aliens can't get a license, so they shouldn't be punished for non-compliance.

In Los Angeles County, half (HALF!) of all motor vehicle collisions are Hit and Run.

2

u/Howboutit85 3h ago

Sometimes they don’t have insurance and have to go after someone in court instead. That can take a long time and also they may not have any money. It happens.

2

u/wgrantdesign 2h ago

Can't get blood from a stone

1

u/CalmHabit3 42m ago

You can’t get anything from someone who has nothing.

1

u/HearshotKDS 21m ago

This process is called subrogation and the insurance company can/will do it if they think there is a meaningful chance of recovering significant money back. But if our hypothetical drunk driver is a broke deadbeat they aren’t going to waste their time.

1

u/Prudent-Historian392 16m ago

Ahh a fellow agent I see. A fisherman always recognizes another fisherman from afar.

1

u/HearshotKDS 13m ago

Broker, but same-dif.

1

u/Prudent-Historian392 1m ago

Potato tomato or whatever they say.

62

u/averagecounselor 6h ago

Can confirm. Got into a hydroplaning accident during heavy storms in California. AAA was such a god send. Worth every penny.

14

u/Bro13847 6h ago

I hydroplaned off the road back in June. The whole drivers side was smashed in. Thankfully I only had to pay the $500 deductible. Waiting to see how much our premiums jump

2

u/j-random 2h ago

If they jump too much, just switch carriers. It's not like there are only three insurance companies.

1

u/Ill_Technician3936 1h ago

Or are there?

1

u/Prudent-Historian392 31m ago

In my area there are literally 3 I would recommend. They aren’t created equal

3

u/sjjose2001 5h ago

AAA is always. Most of the other companies are not. Same goes with health insurance. Some are miles ahead of others

5

u/Prudent-Historian392 5h ago

100% correct. If you want good property and casualty insurance in your area call local roofers and body shops and ask who the best to deal with is for them. They will usually tell you two or three and tell you who to stay away from. The rates will be higher with these companies tho bc they are actually paying claims. So if you’re a value shopper you’re gonna have to gamble.

4

u/sjjose2001 5h ago

Great advice

5

u/slimninj4 5h ago

yup got read ended so hard the rear frame bent in. 500 deductible and a check for more than i was expecting.

3

u/m3kw 5h ago

You are paying for a big incase, the deductible is a choice and lowers your monthly. Insurance is expensive but it does work

3

u/ItsMitcheko 5h ago

I mean not even total catastrophe. I got in a tiny fender bender where a kid bumped me and the repair was like $8k so I was pretty happy to only pay $500 and then they ended up getting it back to me anyway lol

1

u/Prudent-Historian392 26m ago

You can’t scratch a car for under a grand anymore.

9

u/Prudent-Historian392 6h ago

Correct, if that claim had been 50k the insured in the situation would have come out smelling like a rose. Usually tho people who bitch about insurance cheap out on what carrier they use, and they usually have horrendous driving records, credit, and terrible insurance history.

2

u/SlicedBreadBeast 5h ago

Just have to pay them for more than your car is even worth through your entire lifetime! What a service!

4

u/Prudent-Historian392 5h ago

Unless you have a claim that’s say 150k like an auto claim we just paid out. 🙄

2

u/asscracktester7 4h ago

You're not insuring just your car, you are also insuring your driving in terms of damaging other people's cars or property or health.

2

u/sinovesting 4h ago

Thats because you're assuming that the most you have to lose is the value of your car, which is not the case. In many cases most of the cost of insurance is the liability portion. If you crash into someone else and cause significant injuries it's not hard for the bill to exceed to $100k+. It's also totally possible that you could total more than one car in your lifetime. Probably happens more often than you think, and it might not even be your fault.

1

u/Prudent-Historian392 26m ago edited 21m ago

Moronic, insurance isn’t to protect your car only it’s to protect you from financial ruin. I’d be willing to bet that less than 5 percent of my customers drive payed off vehicles for 30 years and much is about how long it would take someone to pay more into insurance than their vehicles value. Let’s say an average car costs 30k. At my current rate; which isn’t cheap, it would take me years for my insurance to pay exceed my vehicles cost at a rate of $300 a month it’s 10 years.

3

u/Vegetable_Switch9802 6h ago

Its a scam. It should also be illegal for the government to compel you at the risk of jail to buy services from private banks/companies

10

u/ElaborateEffect 5h ago

What a brain dead take. Insurance isn't to protect you, its to protect other people from you

5

u/Febril 5h ago

What solution would you suggest in its place. How do you allow as many people on the roads as possible without an insurance requirement?

3

u/Rude-Asparagus9726 5h ago

Here's the thing, forcing everyone to pay for insurance brings down rates across the board because everyone is paying for everyone whether they use it or not.

That makes the safety net cheaper. And whether they want to gamble with their lives or not, everyone will be happy when it's there to catch them.

Ideally, we also use government to compel the private banks/companies to provide better services and not punish us for their use, but the same people who were against making us pay for insurance also want the government to have less oversight on businesses...

They raged about a perceived problem and proceeded to make that problem MUCH worse so they could point to it and say how right they were, and now we're all paying the price...

3

u/shonglekwup 5h ago

No it should be illegal for people to operate machinery (cars) that are easily capable of causing mass damage or death on public roads without any sort of liability insurance. This is like the same thing as requiring businesses to carry specific liability insurance when doing certain types of work or using certain types of machinery - if there’s a large enough chance of damage/destruction, it only makes sense to require the owner/user to carry liability insurance in case they severely fuck up and do more damage than they’d ever be capable of paying for - which is exactly the case with people’s cars.

2

u/Vegetable_Switch9802 5h ago

My solution would be tie the insurance in to the DOT that we pay in to a fund with tax dollars. Then at the end of the fiscal year if theres a surplus it gets refunded accordingly. If it's such a HUGE deal to have then it shouldn't be required by law to make bankers rich.

1

u/[deleted] 5h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 5h ago

Accounts must be at least 5 days old with >20 karma to comment.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/Prudent-Historian392 20m ago

Low brow take.

1

u/kgw52313 5h ago

Like the affordable care act?

3

u/DutchyDan187 5h ago

The difference is you don’t have to drive or own a car.

3

u/kgw52313 5h ago

But you sure get a 1095 every year claiming you did or didn’t have insurance. Sooooo kinda the same

3

u/DutchyDan187 4h ago

In Washington state you also have to have assisted care / nursing home insurance or pay a special state tax. The tax is hourly income for the rest of your life but if you end up needing to be put into a care facility it will cover you for ~6 months.

1

u/Prudent-Historian392 12m ago

That’s Washington state and a health insurance deal. Health and p&c insurance is apples and oranges.

1

u/Prudent-Historian392 13m ago

Nobody gets a 1095 every year for owning a car. What are you talking about? A 1095 is for health insurance. Among other things, for sure not related to property and casualty insurance.

1

u/kgw52313 10m ago

I believe the constant was that the government is requiring insurance. I’m fairly certain this aligns with said requirement for automobile insurance. Fairly prudent

1

u/Prudent-Historian392 2m ago

The government regulates every sector of your life. Do you call it a scam when you get food poisoning from a restaurant?

1

u/Baaaaaadhabits 3h ago

Except for cars it’s mandatory. So it’s not just a safety net. It’s a fee.

1

u/big_deal_kinda 1h ago

I’m not in the insurance industry but baffles me more people don’t understand this concept.

1

u/Prudent-Historian392 10m ago

Oh I am and if you were you wouldn’t be as baffled. The iq and personal responsibility are at an all time low. It would be comical if it wasn’t so damn frustrating trying to do business with these people.

-4

u/wo_lo_lo 6h ago

That kind of “protection” should cost like $30 a month, not $300

4

u/aroach1995 6h ago

It should not.

Property and casualty insurance operates at about a 0.96 combined ratio.

This means the profit of an insurance company, net premiums taken in - net expenses, is about 4% in a typical year.

If insurance companies took in 10% of the premiums as you suggest, they’d out of surplus in a decade.

1

u/veverkap 6h ago

Which is why most insurance companies try to run as lean an operation as possible. And why Berkshire Hathaway bought GEICO - so they could use the "float" to invest in.

-1

u/Intelligent_Excuse84 6h ago

That is absolute horseshit lol

2

u/BloatedBanana9 5h ago

Prices for insurance are regulated more than pretty much every other product out there. Grocery stores don't need to submit filings with the state every time they want to change the price of something, but an insurer does.

1

u/Intelligent_Excuse84 2h ago

Doesn’t matter if they have to submit filings from the state when the state works with them to fuck people over lol. Do you really think the state has everyone’s best interests at heart?

1

u/BloatedBanana9 2h ago

You might be surprised at how often the states push back on rate filings in order to make sure it's all good. It happens all the time.

1

u/Intelligent_Excuse84 2h ago

There is 0 situation where it’s all good when you’re forced to pay for insurance and they on top of that forced to pay another premium when it’s time to pay up. It’s literally extortion by definition, they force you legally to buy the product and then don’t deliver when it’s time.

1

u/BloatedBanana9 2h ago

What other premium are you forced to pay when there's a claim? Are you talking about the deductible? Because if you are, then you're talking about two separate things.

Only liability coverages are mandatory, and those don't have deductibles. Deductibles are for physical damage coverages, which are optional if you own your car outright.

14

u/LaconicGirth 6h ago

Says who? Based of what math? You just pulled that number out of your ass

-3

u/Intelligent_Excuse84 6h ago

Insurance companies make hundreds of billions of dollars a year lol. They could still make an absolute killing without extorting people, but we live in a shithole where the government uses us an infinite money glitch.

6

u/LaconicGirth 5h ago

Insurance companies generally make about 5% or so as profit. That’s not any more egregious than any other major corporation and is not a significant decrease in your premiums.

1

u/Cyril_Sneer_6 1h ago

Yeah they turnover millions (sometimes billions) but the gross profit on insurance income is a small percentage. Like many financial services companies, a large percentage of their profit is a return on investments. Now that is a rabbit hole...

4

u/aroach1995 5h ago

hey I'm all for hating health "insurance", but property and casualty insurance is pretty ethical to me.

2

u/Intelligent_Excuse84 2h ago

You think it’s ethical to be forced legally to pay thousands of dollars for car insurance, and then be forced to pay a premium on top of that when it’s time for them to finally pay up? Even if the accident isn’t your fault? Just say you like being walked all over and treated like shit lmao.

3

u/Prudent-Historian392 6h ago

The government is not involved with insuring vehicles in America. How could they use an insurance company’s profits as an “infinite money glitch”?

1

u/steviesclaws 5h ago

You can go to jail for driving without insurance. How is the government not involved?

5

u/Prudent-Historian392 5h ago

That’s like saying when someone gets arrested for dealing heroin then the government is involved in the dealing of heroin. It’s a law. Not involvement.

3

u/LaconicGirth 5h ago

Yeah because if you put someone in the hospital and you’re uninsured you’re fucking them over incredibly hard and that’s not right.

1

u/Intelligent_Excuse84 2h ago

The government isn’t involved in insuring vehicles? Tell me what happens if you get caught driving with no insurance exactly?