speaking of liability protection

[tryan]

No sure how many on this board have been sued - I have a few times - MOST start with a letter from a lawyer which basically says "Please provide us with your liability insurance company contact." One tactic I've seen used to avoid these suits (for small expected claims < 10k) is simply throw the letter away ... make them FIND you and drag you into court. You must be summoned in person; an address/POB cannot be summoned to court. The dollars involved simply do not permit a manhunt. Now if it's your nieghbor ... well ...

Yes I keep liability on all the rentals (100k policy runs about $200/unit). Figure I'll get the same representation as the guy with 1/2 million policy ... but less representation than the guy with >1 million on the line.

What insurance company allows umbrella's for people with >= 6 rentals ??

 

[donheff]

As far as my statement, I did not mean that having umbrella coverage or high liability limits somehow makes you a target, or an "attraction" for lawsuits in the abstract. That is simply not true. What I meant was, in the event you did have an accident or do something which may cause you to be liable to someone else, and in that event, and only in that event, if the injured party gets a lawyer and the lawyer finds out that you have very high liability coverage, it then becomes more likely, not less likely, that you will be sued.

I'm not buying it. First, having the large umbrella policy makes it likely that the insurance company will bring out the big legal guns to protect their assets. So, the holder seems well protected in any event. Second, even if you are correct, the hapless retiree with a $2M portfolio and meager insurance is a much bigger target in a juicy liability case. If the case is solid, the insurance company may conclude that they are going to be out the max coverage (say $300 K) anyway and see no value in mounting a vigorous defense to protect the customer's $2M personal assets. The ambulance chaser will recognize this and see you as a more attractive target -- and your assets are pretty easy to ferret out. With the umbrella, at least you are assured of a vigorous defense.

 

[lazygood4nothinbum]

ibid & how would they find out about the umbrella insurance policy at all? wouldn't the suit first be defended by the insurance company responsible for the lower amount covered before the umbrella policy would kick in? or do all the held policies, and their associated lawyers, come into play at once?

 

[ziggy29]

ibid & how would they find out about the umbrella insurance policy at all? wouldn't the suit first be defended by the insurance company responsible for the lower amount covered before the umbrella policy would kick in? or do all the held policies come into play at once?

The only thing I can think of is that if they know the insurance company's lawyer is defending you, then you potentially have a LOT of money at stake, either personally or through your liability policy. If you had minimum legal liability on auto insurance, for example, the insurance company might not bother mounting a legal defense and just pay out. But when they defend you (and themselves) vigorously, you can bet there's probably a few zeroes behind the policy limits.

 

[d]

don't mean to prolong this thread, but i just received my premium notice and it reminded me of a "parallel product": unisured/underinsured motorist coverage ... so that if you need to collect, and the yahoo who rear-ended you does not have sufficient coverage ...

 

[REWahoo]

don't mean to prolong this thread, but i just received my premium notice and it reminded me of a "parallel product": unisured/underinsured motorist coverage ... so that if you need to collect, and the yahoo who rear-ended you does not have sufficient coverage ...

Yep. http://early-retirement.org/forums/index.php?topic=11503.msg227940#msg227940