Mich. Ups Catastrophic Claims Charge

March 22, 2004

  • March 23, 2004 at 5:58 am
    DAVID R WILLIAMS says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    THIS INSURANCE IS FOR INSURANCE COMPANY NOT FOR THE DRIVERS WERE PAYING FOR INSURANCE THE COMPANIES HAVE TO HAVE NOT US NO BODY PAYS ARE INSURANCE WHY ARE WE PAYING FOR THERE ITS TIME TO STAND UP AND GET RID OF THE INSURANCE COMPANIES

  • March 25, 2004 at 10:05 am
    linda knight says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    What is the effective date of the new surcharge amount?

  • March 25, 2004 at 6:00 am
    Kevin B. O'Reilly says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Linda, it would take effect July 1. I should have included it in the story. Thanks for asking.

  • March 27, 2004 at 10:28 am
    Kurt Gallinger says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The recently announced MCCA premium assessment is in no way a surcharge. Your headline and article mischaracterizing it as a surcharge are regrettable. Nor is it excusable for a trade publication to report such misinformation as factual based on a story in a local newspaper (you cited to the Lansing State Journal).

    The MCCA is nothing more than a specialty reinsurer providing reinsurance for the unlimited lifetime medical benefits required under Michigan’s generous auto no-fault system. The MCCA assesses individual insurers their proportionate share for the cost of this reinsurance. The MCCA cannot and does not surcharge indiviudal policies. In fact, the MCCA has no relationship with individual policy holders. It provides reinsurance service to Michigan automobile insurers by pooling the costs of catastrophic losses.

    By reporting the MCCA assessment as a “surcharge tacked on to consumers’ auto insurance bills,” the Insurance Journal irresponsibly contributed to the confusion surrounding the MCCA’s role in safeguarding the generous medical benefits afforded under Michigan law.

  • May 1, 2004 at 11:16 am
    Tony Bertolini says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Mr. Gallinger may be an attorney and understand how to interpret law in a way that makes it seem that a legitimate publication has misinformed the public. Mr. Gallinger, you can call it what you like, but call a spade a spade. And by the way, take a look at your last insurance bill. I have a line item that specifically calls out an MCCA Surcharge. Seems that the insurance company has no issue with what it is or called. And if you really believe that there is no relationship with individual policy holders you are only deluding yourself. I see this relationship every time I receive my insurance statement. The relationship for me and every other vehicle owner in Michigan equates to about $104 per vehicle. Thanks for your opinion but insurance lawyers who assume their interpretation of law as fact is what has contributed to insurance companies’ practice of “legally” ripping off the American public

  • June 3, 2004 at 9:06 am
    Joel Crawford says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    RIPOFF with a capital R. My MCCA cost this year is $640 = $184 x 5 household vehicles (2 cars and 3 motorcycles), only two drivers. We can only operate two vehicles at any given time. Not fair. At least limit these charges to the max. number of drivers in the household. If this comission is on the up and up, why are their procedings closed to the public and press? Why are they not subject to audit? Why is this comission populated by insurance executives? Why can’t the legislation be changed or ammended? Our legislators are afraid to P.O. the insurance lobby. $$$ When the stock market is down, my investments/returns suffer on top of that the MCCA raises my cost, i.e., SURCHARGES to cover their poor market returns. Do you ever drive around and wonder how people can afford the $300,000 – $500,000 homes going up in Lansing? 1) Insurance execs. 2) Lawyers or c) Insurance Lawyers. We’re screwed. Whadya think?

  • March 13, 2010 at 5:35 am
    James Fulkerth says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Another reason for me to get the hell out of this state as soon as possible!

  • July 1, 2010 at 8:09 am
    David Myers says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I have decided that the rates in Michigan are to high even without the surcharge so I will now become one of the uninsured motorist we also pay for!



Add a Comment

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

*