Poll: What is your total liability coverage?

[PatrickA5]

I currently have 250/500 and a 1 million Umbrella. I feel like that is enough for the vast majority of potential claims against me. On the other side of the coin, I think my coverage is a decent amount of compensation to a victim if I cause them severe harm. I have little respect for people that under insure when they have the means to adequately protect themselves and their potential victims.

I agree with the above, that not many settlements/verdicts go over the policy limits. Most people with the state minimum don't have anything extra to go after.

 

[ncbill]

Even if you have umbrella coverage equal to your net worth it doesn't provide total protection. For example, the most frequent response is $1-$2.99m. So let's say you have $3m net worth and $3m of liability coverage. You get into an accident and are sued and the jury awards the plaintiff $6 million. You're screwed. An oversimplification but you get the idea.

Your IRAs, 401ks and certain other assets would be protected, but you're still screwed.

As discussed many times over on Bogleheads the reality is that the case ends up settling for the insurance limits when an individual (not corporate) defendant has that level of insurance coverage.

Don't forget the plaintiff's attorney is working on contingency & wants to get paid, so there would be pressure from them towards the plaintiff to accept a 7-figure settlement.

And the injured plaintiff usually needs that settlement ASAP. They can't afford to spend years in litigation.

 

[euro]

$4M umbrella.

same here

 

[DEC-1982]

I currently have 250/500 and a 1 million Umbrella. I feel like that is enough for the vast majority of potential claims against me.

Same here.
Luck plays a part in our lives and one hopes what we choose will work out.

 

[NoiseBoy]

I currently have 250/500 and a 1 million Umbrella. I feel like that is enough for the vast majority of potential claims against me.

Same here. I added the umbrella policy two years ago and I recall that they had to tweak my car coverage at that time. However, the added cost was very small and the umbrella policy itself is very affordable. $1 million is more than the sum of my assets that are outside of qualified retirement accounts, although I do need to keep an eye on that.

 

[copyright1997reloaded]

Question for y'all - do any of you have an uninsured/underinsured add on to your umbrella policy?

 

[pb4uski]

I do not.

 

[Koolau]

Only a Million. Hope that's enough. Hope I never need it.

 

[Surewhitey]

We have 250/500 on the car. 300 liability on the house. 2/3 protected by the state of Texas and ~1mm at risk. No real estate other than the home...

Just got this estimate for the umbrella. Does this look pretty standard on coverage vs cost?

 

[PatrickA5]

Question for y'all - do any of you have an uninsured/underinsured add on to your umbrella policy?

Is that even a thing?

 

[JoeWras]

Is that even a thing?

I think this is state dependent. In my state, it isn't a thing, instead, you just up the limits of UM on the auto policy. The standard UM limits are totally de-linked from the liability you choose. So for example, I can choose $300k for my liability, but the UM coverage defaults to $30k. It doesn't match. You have to work with the agent to make sure the UM limits go up to something you feel comfortable with. And even then, the state law limits UM at $1M.

This can help cover you or a loved one who is badly injured and needs treatment, but only up to a judgement of $1M, which isn't much if someone ends up on a wheelchair for the rest of their life. And the default of $30k seems ridiculous more and more.

There are other quirks in my state that only an insurance person can understand. The UM coverage differs on what it will cover if the other party is uninsured, versus underinsured. Crazy stuff.

 

[Dtail]

Question for y'all - do any of you have an uninsured/underinsured add on to your umbrella policy?

Not ours, but many uninsured Florida drivers.

 

[rembrandt]

 

[Stormy Kromer]

I think this is state dependent. In my state, it isn't a thing, instead, you just up the limits of UM on the auto policy. The standard UM limits are totally de-linked from the liability you choose. So for example, I can choose $300k for my liability, but the UM coverage defaults to $30k. It doesn't match. You have to work with the agent to make sure the UM limits go up to something you feel comfortable with. And even then, the state law limits UM at $1M.

This can help cover you or a loved one who is badly injured and needs treatment, but only up to a judgement of $1M, which isn't much if someone ends up on a wheelchair for the rest of their life. And the default of $30k seems ridiculous more and more.

There are other quirks in my state that only an insurance person can understand. The UM coverage differs on what it will cover if the other party is uninsured, versus underinsured. Crazy stuff.

I have UM/UIM limits of $500/$500 on my Personal Auto Policy. My agent offered the option to add UM/UIM limits of $1,000,000/$1,000,000 to my Umbrella. (I carry $5,000,000 liability limits on my Umbrella).

I declined the UM/UIM option on my umbrella. The cost would have been $90 per vehicle. I chose to spend the $90 to raise my liability limits from $3,000,000 to $5,000,000 instead.

I realize how important UM/UIM coverages are, but there comes a point where everyone has to draw the line on insurance coverage. I have adequate health insurance and no longer have earned income to replace in case of injury. If I was still relying on earned income I would consider the UM/UIM option on the umbrella. But first I would make sure I had high limits of disability coverage, that protects you no matter how you become disabled, not just auto accidents.

 

[Kings over Queens]

Question for y'all - do any of you have an uninsured/underinsured add on to your umbrella policy?

I don't recall, so I had to look, and realize I don't have it included. I'll check on that on Monday.

 

[Kings over Queens]

Is that even a thing?

It is, but not all carriers offer it and those that do, may only offer a lower amount.

A big misconception about the coverage is that claims are easily settled in your favor when you have it, and that isn't the case. Progressive got a ton of bad press over what the uninformed would have deemed a simple case.

Essentially, when you make a claim against your uninsured motorist coverage, YOUR insurance company steps into the shoes of the person you had the accident with, and defends them (essentially) against your claim. Its one of those times when the company with whom you have a contract and with whom is supposed to owe you a duty shifts, and becomes adversarial.

 

[Stormy Kromer]

That is correct, you have to make a claim against your own company and gets awkward. That is why many insurance companies will not write auto insurance for their own employees.

 

[grasshopper]

30 Miles from Mexico,I wouldn't leave home without UM/UIM coverage.

 

[MarieIG]

It is, but not all carriers offer it and those that do, may only offer a lower amount.

A big misconception about the coverage is that claims are easily settled in your favor when you have it, and that isn't the case. Progressive got a ton of bad press over what the uninformed would have deemed a simple case.

Essentially, when you make a claim against your uninsured motorist coverage, YOUR insurance company steps into the shoes of the person you had the accident with, and defends them (essentially) against your claim. Its one of those times when the company with whom you have a contract and with whom is supposed to owe you a duty shifts, and becomes adversarial.

I didn't have an MVA wherein I submitted an uninsured/ underinsured claim, but I would if I had been seriously injured. I made a claim for a leaky refrigerator under the homeowners policy, and due to the extent of the damage, the process was adversarial, extremely high stress, and the claim was transferred to four separate agents. (They eventually ended up paying.)

IMHO, with the MVAs, it is best to hire an attorney who specializes in this area, as there may be ins-and-outs in a particular state of which a claimant/ insured may not be aware. For example, with regard to under insurance, one may have to obtain a tender of the under insured policy limits, and consent of insured's carrier to a settlement with the under insured's carrier (as well as meeting proximate cause and injury thresh holds). There are of course nuances and ways to address a situation where prerequisites are met and consent is unreasonably withheld. With regard to un insured, you may need to establish contact as well as proximate cause and injury thresh holds. Your insurance company typically wants a statement, it it may benefit the claimant to be prepped first. If your state mandates arbitration, you want your Demand for Arbitration to be properly prepared so as not to waive any portion of your potential recovery. The attorney may also be able to structure a settlement in a manner to avoid it being taxable (i.e. based upon injuries as opposed to loss of income). The arbitration proceedings are typically quicker (Demand for Arbitration/ Petition to Stay Arbitration / decision / discovery / arbitration) than the pre-trial / trial process. At least, so I've heard.

 

[JoeWras]

What's an MVA?

Hmmm. Guessing: motor vehicle accident?

Kind of like having an MI instead of a heart attack.

 

[MarieIG]

What's an MVA?

Hmmm. Guessing: motor vehicle accident?

Kind of like having an MI instead of a heart attack.

Yes.

 

[Kings over Queens]

I didn't have an MVA wherein I submitted an uninsured/ underinsured claim, but I would if I had been seriously injured. I made a claim for a leaky refrigerator under the homeowners policy, and due to the extent of the damage, the process was adversarial, extremely high stress, and the claim was transferred to four separate agents. (They eventually ended up paying.)

If I remember, you like me have experience in this arena.

In your example, the experience probably felt adversarial, and rightfully so, because it was unfamiliar and unpleasant. Claims suck. However, your insurance company with whom you have a 1st party contract is obligated to treat you fairly and in accordance with the contractual terms of the policy, whereas the UM/UIM claim is akin to a 3rd party BI/PD claim and where your own company is defending the other driver (essentially) against you and your claim. It's bizarre.

 

[teej1985]

If I remember, you like me have experience in this arena.

In your example, the experience probably felt adversarial, and rightfully so, because it was unfamiliar and unpleasant. Claims suck. However, your insurance company with whom you have a 1st party contract is obligated to treat you fairly and in accordance with the contractual terms of the policy, whereas the UM/UIM claim is akin to a 3rd party BI/PD claim and where your own company is defending the other driver (essentially) against you and your claim. It's bizarre.

My experience was not adversial. They just told me to send all my medical bills and eventually they spit out an offer. It was higher than I expected for "pain and suffering", but still very significantly below the policy max, so I figured I might as well see what a lawyer can do. The insurance company immediately agreed that the uninsured driver was 100% at fault and that my UM BI coverage applied. They also were able to subrogate a fair amount of my $1k deductible on the total loss collision claim. The total loss payout was generous compared to any equivalent vehicles that I saw for sale. They of course "lowballed" my UM payout. They agreed to pay policy max after I lawyered up. What's crazy to me is if they had even offered me, say, 80% of my policy max, they would have saved big $$$ and maybe I would have just taken it, as with lawyer fees and medical expenses, I barely received over 60% of the policy max. Now maybe it's my fault for not better describing the lifestyle consequences of my injuries and not knowing how to write like a lawyer, but IDK. I spent about a year on the claim before I lawyered up and got an initial offer. Most of the waiting game was all the medical facilities and providers providing records, allegedly. It took another year after the lawyer took over. I definitely think the hassle was worth the premium. I got lucky that the insurance company didn't try to find their own medical expert to dispute the findings and that it didn't get dragged out in court as the lawyer would have taken a larger cut.

 

[PatrickA5]

I was able to get $25K (policy max) in underinsured motorist paid to me. Of course, I had to have a lawyer do it for me. What's weird is my insurance company (SF) paid out the 25K before the other persons insurance (also SF) paid out anything for his part of the liability. I guess my lawyer was able to convince SF that the total claim would end up being more than the total liability limits on the other party ($100K).

Overall, we were able to settle for a total of around $130K - of which I got about a dollar. LOL!

 

[Kings over Queens]

They of course "lowballed" my UM payout. They agreed to pay policy max after I lawyered up. What's crazy to me is if they had even offered me, say, 80% of my policy max, they would have saved big $$$ and maybe I would have just taken it, as with lawyer fees and medical expenses, I barely received over 60% of the policy max.

What you just described it what I'd call adversarial. YOUR insurance company was not acting in YOUR interest in settling the UM claim. They viewed you as an adversarial party trying to extract money from them on behalf of the uninsured driver.

I think an understanding of 1st party and 3rd party helps here. Your car insurance policy has 2 (for simplicity sake) portions, 3rd party defense coverage which is the bodily injury and property damage designed to defend you against claims and pay damage, and 1st party coverage in terms of collision which is designed to pay you, the insured, when your car is damaged.

UM/UIM coverage it technically a 1st party coverage because you, the insured, are the ones entitled to benefit form it, however it acts and functions as a 3rd party coverage. Following is a snip from my UM coverage from the car insurance policy. Insurance company will compensate (good) the insured however any damages arising out of a suit without their consent isn't binding. What that means is that your bodily injury claim against the driver isn't going to determine your payment under UM, you must bring a separate claim for that.