[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
The only way my wife and I could have avoided these was by leaving the car in the garage.
[/quote]
You neglect the most obvious case. The only way to avoid auto accidents is to not own a car.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
I was hit from behind while stopped at a red light. My wife was hit from behind while stopped at a red light. My car was hit while parked in a parking space. My pickup was clipped by an 18 wheeler while I was stopped at the stop line waiting for a red arrow to turn green, the truck was forced to merge left into a temporary lane on the other side of the intersection and merged too early.
[/quote]
Was there even enough damage to warrant filing a claim? I’m just curious, not questioning your experiences. It seems that most rear-endings, especially those similar to your first two examples of sitting at a red light, are very light on damage if there even is any.
Also, if you did file claims on any or all of these, were you satisfied with the insurance company’s handling of it?
[quote]malonetd wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
I was hit from behind while stopped at a red light. My wife was hit from behind while stopped at a red light. My car was hit while parked in a parking space. My pickup was clipped by an 18 wheeler while I was stopped at the stop line waiting for a red arrow to turn green, the truck was forced to merge left into a temporary lane on the other side of the intersection and merged too early.
Was there even enough damage to warrant filing a claim? I’m just curious, not questioning your experiences. It seems that most rear-endings, especially those similar to your first two examples of sitting at a red light, are very light on damage if there even is any.
Also, if you did file claims on any or all of these, were you satisfied with the insurance company’s handling of it?[/quote]
I filed claims with all 4 accidents. The rear enders were pretty hard hits. The other persons insurance paid for 3 of the repairs. The truck accident occurred in Montreal which is “no fault” so my insurance company paid for that. I have no complaints about the handling of any of the situation and none of these raised my rates.
I was also rear ended at a stop sign with no damage. The guy took off and I got his plate number and called it in to the cops. He admitted to it but there was no damage to either car and the cops wouldn’t even give him a ticket.
I am an excellent driver.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
I am an excellent driver. [/quote]
On the internet we all are.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
How can they force someone to pay, especially quick enough to fix my car right away? What if the person doesn’t have the money? do I take out a loan to fix my car and hope he pays it back? Good luck collecting.
[/quote]
This is the problem with strict-libertarianism. If you allow people to behave like assholes they will!
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
I am an excellent driver. [/quote]
So is this guy.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
I have no complaints about the handling of any of the situation and none of these raised my rates.
[/quote]
Well, if you have no complaints, I guess that’s good for you. I, personally, can’t stand the idea of paying for something and never getting anything in return. Maybe if there was some sort of no-accident refund or some incentive to keep paying. But there’s not. People pay based on fear. It’s like the lottery, only instead of fear, people pay based on hope.
I don’t even get insurance when I play blackjack.
[quote]beebuddy wrote:
This is the problem with strict-libertarianism. If you allow people to behave like assholes they will![/quote]
Being an asshole is not a crime. Destroying someone’s property is.
How can the government enforce insurance laws but not repayment of debt? Something just seems so contradictory about such claims.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
beebuddy wrote:
This is the problem with strict-libertarianism. If you allow people to behave like assholes they will!
Being an asshole is not a crime. Destroying someone’s property is.
How can the government enforce insurance laws but not repayment of debt? Something just seems so contradictory about such claims.[/quote]
Being an asshole in this case is getting drunk and smashing someone else’s car. As Zap pointed out GOOD LUCK! Collecting before just seems to work better.
Another example of this basic human flaw is people claiming extra dependents so they can get a larger tax-return. People aren’t always rational, for instance most people could get a better return on that cash if they had the money immediately, but they can’t force themselves to save. Some people are just fucked, really.
[quote]beebuddy wrote:
Another example of this basic human flaw is people claiming extra dependents so they can get a larger tax-return. People aren’t always rational, for instance most people could get a better return on that cash if they had the money immediately, but they can’t force themselves to save. Some people are just fucked, really.[/quote]
I don’t understand this in people either. In fact, I owe taxes every year. I haven’t gotten a refund in years.
[quote]malonetd wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
I am an excellent driver.
So is this guy.[/quote]
K-Mart sucks.
[quote]malonetd wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
I have no complaints about the handling of any of the situation and none of these raised my rates.
Well, if you have no complaints, I guess that’s good for you. I, personally, can’t stand the idea of paying for something and never getting anything in return. Maybe if there was some sort of no-accident refund or some incentive to keep paying. But there’s not. People pay based on fear. It’s like the lottery, only instead of fear, people pay based on hope.
I don’t even get insurance when I play blackjack.[/quote]
I dropped my collision coverage years ago. I dislike insurance as well. If I wreck my car by myself I will pay for a new one out of my own pocket but I do not trust others to pay if they wreck mine.
Can you drive out of state with no insurance?
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
beebuddy wrote:
This is the problem with strict-libertarianism. If you allow people to behave like assholes they will!
Being an asshole is not a crime. Destroying someone’s property is.
How can the government enforce insurance laws but not repayment of debt? Something just seems so contradictory about such claims.[/quote]
People don’t pay debt they owe to raise their own kids. How many are going to pay for damage to a strangers car?
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
If I wreck my car by myself I will pay for a new one out of my own pocket but I do not trust others to pay if they wreck mine…
[/quote]
Yet your actions speak otherwise. If you don’t trust others to pay their liabilities why do you not have collision? Collision coverage allows your insurer to seek restitution in your name when you are not held liable.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
People don’t pay debt they owe to raise their own kids. How many are going to pay for damage to a strangers car?[/quote]
First of all, child support isn’t a debt.
The state will garner one’s wages to make one pay child support and they can do the same to people who own in damages.
You claim the state has the power to keep civilization in order yet you contradict that by implying it isn’t capable of such a simple task like enforcing debt repayment.
Frankly, the only use for government is to enforce contracts; and if it cannot do that then there is no point in its existence.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Can you drive out of state with no insurance?[/quote]
I don’t know and really never thought about it. I rarely drive out of state. When I do go somewhere long distance, I usually rent a car. My truck doesn’t get good enough gas mileage to justify long road trips. Plus, I don’t know how far I would trust it with over 250,000 miles on it.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
If I wreck my car by myself I will pay for a new one out of my own pocket but I do not trust others to pay if they wreck mine…
Yet your actions speak otherwise. If you don’t trust others to pay their liabilities why do you not have collision? Collision coverage allows your insurer to seek restitution in your name when you are not held liable.[/quote]
Because collision costs more and everyone in my state is obligated to have car insurance and most do except in Philly.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
People don’t pay debt they owe to raise their own kids. How many are going to pay for damage to a strangers car?
First of all, child support isn’t a debt.
The state will garner one’s wages to make one pay child support and they can do the same to people who own in damages.
You claim the state has the power to keep civilization in order yet you contradict that by implying it isn’t capable of such a simple task like enforcing debt repayment.
Frankly, the only use for government is to enforce contracts; and if it cannot do that then there is no point in its existence.[/quote]
Garner ones wages? As if these people that have tradional jobs where that is an option. Good luck garnering a waiters or a students or an under the table landscapers wages.
Government does its job by acting proactively and requiring people to carry insurance. Government has a very tough time making people pay child support. It would have a harder time making people pay for my car repair, while in the meantime I would have to pay out of my pocket. No thanks.
If they want to drive on the road they must follow the rules which include mandatory liability insurance.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
First of all, child support isn’t a debt.
[/quote]
Debt is simply something owed. A missed child support payment is money owed.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
I would have to pay out of my pocket…
[/quote]
We already are paying out of pocket many times over the damage done.