Mass. to Hear Revised High Risk Plan Nov. 10; April 2007 is Target Start Date

October 20, 2006

  • October 23, 2006 at 12:08 pm
    Hal says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Imagine if you will
    A business going to your legislature and saying \”that mean old insurance company won\’t insure me any more. The reps then ask why they won\’t insure and the business owner says.
    Well, we make a product. A few people who use our product get hurt. But we employ people and provide jobs. A few employees get hurt but they know the work is dangerous when they take the job.
    DO YOU REALLY THINK the solution is an assigned risk of any sort to provide insurance for a dangerous product and a dangerous workplace?
    That is exactly what assigned risk auto does. And it does it with no opportunity for profit for the companies recieving the assignments. They only have the opportinity for a loss and good drivers indirectly pick up the bill for it.

  • October 23, 2006 at 1:07 am
    John Lennon says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    What does the current CAR system do? For that matter, what does the entire Mass auto system do if not subsidize bad drivers?

    But for the matter of undesirable drivers, if the state mandates insurance for drivers no insurer wants, they have to force the insurers to take the drivers. Spreading it by market share is much more equitable than the current ERP system.

  • October 23, 2006 at 1:11 am
    Hal says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    States and municipalities provide performance bonds for contractors to build public buildings. They don\’t force-issue them.

  • October 23, 2006 at 1:28 am
    Ringo Starr says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    So is there a comparable way to handle uninsured drivers? I don\’t think performance bonds work for individual drivers. If you agree with that, then which is better, CAR or assigned risk?

    Or, do I misunderstand your point?

  • October 23, 2006 at 1:38 am
    Hal says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    My main business for the past 20 years has been insuring hard to place risks. In that time I have not used the auto assigned risk program (Texas) at all. If you can show the companies how they can make a nickel they will write the risk.

  • October 23, 2006 at 1:53 am
    Paul McCartney says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Have you never had a risk that no insurer would touch? I find that surprising but it could happen in TX where insurers have a little more freedom to set rates. But in MA, there are so many restrictions that there are a lot of drivers no insurer could make a nickel on.

  • October 23, 2006 at 2:09 am
    Hal says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Most assigned risk autos are for personal auto.
    My favorites are:
    A guy who had four accidents when he was referred to me. Turns out he had a cataract on one eye and diminished periferal vision in the other. A couple months after I wrote him he got his cataract fixed. No losses ever in our agency – it\’s been 5 years.
    The other was a guy with epilepsy. State Farm had non-renewed him for an accident he had.
    His medicine tended to get off about every three years or so.
    State Farm would write him when his record cleared. Then non-renew after his accident.
    The state never caught on to his problem. The police would always suspect he\’d gone to sleep and in an after-siesure stupor he didn\’t say much.
    Finally after 14 years he had a siesure going out of his driveway and ran all over his neighbor\’s yard. The cop didn\’t think he went to sleep. Our bill was $180.
    So State Farm got the big bills, we got the right premium for the risk. And he\’s still insured with the company we started him with. Now he has to do a med report each year to renew his license, which really should have been the case all along.

  • October 23, 2006 at 2:23 am
    George Harrison says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Those are great success stories but have you ever had a risk you couldn\’t get any insurer to touch? And have you had cases where the driver didn\’t buy because he couldn\’t afford the premium the insurer wanted to take the risk?

    If yes to either, I hope you will concede that sometimes some sort of placement mechanism is necessary.

  • October 23, 2006 at 2:34 am
    Hal says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I had a guy once who wanted to do a business where you could buy-an-insult. His people would go out, sort of like a singing telegram, and tell off your victim for you. They wanted to include pies in the face. We figured that after the first assault charge he\’d be out of business. No quote was provided.
    I regularly talk to would-be long hall truck drivers who cannot pay for their rig and insurance at the same time.
    Is the purpose of an assigned risk program to subsidise premium payments? If so just enlarge your welfare program and quit throwing charges to your good risks.

  • October 23, 2006 at 2:55 am
    Yoko Ono says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Subsidized premiums are not the purpose but are the consequence of assigned risk. Companies can\’t make money on these risks and if the plan charged adequate premium, very few could afford it.

    On most issues, I tend to your laisser faire views but I like the fact that if some bozo runs into me, he more than likely has insurance. So if we want every other guy to be insured, we have to allow for the uninsurable – a necessary evil. In personal auto, those that can\’t afford both their car payment and insurance are likely to go without the latter.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*