This limit increase is very neded. In my agency one of the biggest loss catagories we have is the under-insured loss! And, my state does have 25/50/10 set as the minimums! It doesn’t take much to cause $25,000 of injuries or even $25,000 of property damage now a days. Also, why are the agents in LA even offering inadaquate coverage. I do understand why the carriers are figting it… but for any increase in liability premium there should be an offset savings in UMBI/UMPD rates. I bet they didn’t share that with the lawmakers…
There is no possible justification for such low limits unless you like to provide inadequate compensation for losses. Citizens will be better protected with higher limits and there will be a reduction in UM/UIM claims. The only legitimate drawback is that a premium increase may cause some increase in the nymber of uninsured. With today’s medical costs, 25/50 is fast becoming insufficient. 25/50 is certainly the predominate standard in today’s world, so get this approved!
What a joke that anyone would consider 25/50/10 to be adequate. Add a zero and you have a start at 250/500/100. At the
same time cut maximum attorney contingency fees to no more than 12% (Current max is 50% PLUS expenses) Our laws (made by attorneys) should be to protect the public not to enrich the legal profession for client injuries
The 10/30/10 mandatory limit is ridiculously low. I wouldn’t dream of carrying anything less than 100/300/100 – And I live in Michigan, where that coverage is secondary to a host of No-Fault coverages!
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
This limit increase is very neded. In my agency one of the biggest loss catagories we have is the under-insured loss! And, my state does have 25/50/10 set as the minimums! It doesn’t take much to cause $25,000 of injuries or even $25,000 of property damage now a days. Also, why are the agents in LA even offering inadaquate coverage. I do understand why the carriers are figting it… but for any increase in liability premium there should be an offset savings in UMBI/UMPD rates. I bet they didn’t share that with the lawmakers…
SWYMMER
There is no possible justification for such low limits unless you like to provide inadequate compensation for losses. Citizens will be better protected with higher limits and there will be a reduction in UM/UIM claims. The only legitimate drawback is that a premium increase may cause some increase in the nymber of uninsured. With today’s medical costs, 25/50 is fast becoming insufficient. 25/50 is certainly the predominate standard in today’s world, so get this approved!
I had an accident in 1970 caused by someone else’s negligence. the 20/40 limit wasn’t sufficient 37 years ago. These limits are a joke.
What a joke that anyone would consider 25/50/10 to be adequate. Add a zero and you have a start at 250/500/100. At the
same time cut maximum attorney contingency fees to no more than 12% (Current max is 50% PLUS expenses) Our laws (made by attorneys) should be to protect the public not to enrich the legal profession for client injuries
The 10/30/10 mandatory limit is ridiculously low. I wouldn’t dream of carrying anything less than 100/300/100 – And I live in Michigan, where that coverage is secondary to a host of No-Fault coverages!