SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: goldworldnet who wrote (354643)3/20/2010 7:22:31 PM
From: mph2 Recommendations  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 793964
 
I have been preaching to people for years about carrying significant limits for uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage, particularly here in California.

The limits for such coverages do depend on the liability limits one carries, but the UM coverages protect the insured (i.e. you) from all those people in multi-colored cars who are illegally driving without insurance and half of the time without valid licenses.

Sometimes you do have to protect yourself. I have handled several cases for people who suffered grievous injuries or the death of loved ones in traffic accidents only to find out that the driver at fault was either uninsured or carried only the legal minimum of $15K/30K. Then I look at the client's own coverages and find out that they too were minimally covered.



To: goldworldnet who wrote (354643)3/20/2010 9:17:24 PM
From: ManyMoose  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793964
 
What can he lose if he doesn't have it? People will go after it under certain circumstances. It's a matter of balancing risk.