Michigan Hopes to Recover Tanker Blast Costs from Insurers

July 23, 2009

  • July 23, 2009 at 1:32 am
    rr says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Let’s hope the driver wasn’t one of those who “named their own price” only to get minimum limits of everything … let’s see which aisle they bought insurance from.

  • July 23, 2009 at 1:58 am
    Guess says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Damn, my thought exactly, either Frogreso or UnSafeCo with a 5/10/10 policy. Since our Guberment let by mr teleunpromptor wants to own everything, why in the hell don’t they ban this type of policy. The minimum should be a $100K single limit, but even that is not enough due to those bottom feeding scum sucking “Esquires.” Oh hell, mr teleunprompter is one of those too!

  • July 23, 2009 at 2:07 am
    Ratemaker says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Guess you guys aren’t all that familiar with Michigan auto coverages.

    The appropriate Michigan coverage, called “PPI” for “property protection insurance,” is payable without regard to fault when a vehicle on the road damages something off the road, like a bridge. It carries a mandatory limit of $1 million.

  • July 23, 2009 at 2:10 am
    Local Boy says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Under Michigan No Fault PPI you are required to carry $1m property damage. It should be a no brainer for the state (if the govenor doesn’t get involved).

  • July 23, 2009 at 2:36 am
    lars says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    And the most interesting tidbit is…..the accident was caused by a person in this country since May and was here for college. He said he had to do what he had to do after losing control on a 50 MPH turn(he might have been going too fast) and hit the tanker loaded with 15,000 gallons of diesel and unleaded gas. The only good part of the accident was that the innocents wer able to get away without being killed.

  • July 23, 2009 at 2:49 am
    rr says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I was unaware of PPI. That’s good information to know. Also sad to hear Lars’ comment …

  • July 23, 2009 at 3:01 am
    Local Boy says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    He was going 70 on a curve marked 50, lost control and swerved over two lanes.
    Only the skill and guts of the two truckers involved prevented serious injury or death.
    The driver’s public comment was “I don’t think I did anything wrong”.

  • July 23, 2009 at 3:26 am
    caffiend says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The tanker truck carrying the fuel is guaranteed to have $5,000,000CSL coverage.

  • July 23, 2009 at 5:37 am
    chad Balaamaba says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    just curious as I have not seen the area where this took place, but wouldn’t the bridge be considered part of the road?

    Also, would the truck CSL would be subject to liability?

    Haven’t handled MI in many years and not familiar with the commercial vehicle laws in MI.

  • July 28, 2009 at 9:48 am
    jsjones51@yahoo.com says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Why should the truckers coverage get into it at all. They didn’t cause the accident. Don’t write in Michigan. Does the no fault drag everybody into it?



Add a Comment

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

*