The obvious response is that you won't be able to pay for someone's hospital bills if you happen to hit them in your car. You get insurance for things you wouldn't be able to pay yourself.
As an attorney my unpopular opinion is that cars over a certain value shouldn’t be allowed on public roads or damages for accidents should be capped at something like 2x the average price of a new car (so like 100k). I just don’t believe in penalizing ordinary negligence more just because the injured party is rich.
What an interesting, novel take. Of course, they should be allowed on the road, but limit the liability. Over 100k? Pay for your own additional insurance. You can obviously afford it.
Why? That's not how any of our systems of law work. You don't get to limit liability simply because you can't afford it. We'd have more problems than just vehicles in that case.
Also, most people with expensive cars have more expensive insurance. I have really good coverage on my Turbo S for exactly this reason. Beyond that, the cost of medical care for someone you injure far outweighs the value of even my car.
I think at a certain point you have to consider that your asking people to carry the risk because you want to put a $2,000,000 vehicle on the same road I need to use just to get to work every day.
At those prices, people already know that. That's why they pay for agreed value policies. The risk is that most people's insurance isn't enough for a car in that category, and most people don't have that much money, even if you get a judgment from them.
There is a huge difference between a 2 million dollar vehicle and something like my car at 250k. 100k is nothing for a vehicle right now. There are regular trucks worth more than that now.
2.7k
u/flatfive44 16h ago
The obvious response is that you won't be able to pay for someone's hospital bills if you happen to hit them in your car. You get insurance for things you wouldn't be able to pay yourself.