# Insurance company suing **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [November 2, 2015, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/insurance-company-suing/736465 "2015-11-02T22:07:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Inigo\_Montoya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inigo_montoya/32/124_2.png) [@Inigo\_Montoya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inigo_Montoya)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2015, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/insurance-company-suing/736465/21 "2015-11-04T19:46:02Z")
> [@slash2k](#): > > Amen. State-minimum coverage is for suckers and people who are judgment-proof and expect to stay that way. I’ll witness that. Two things the suckers neglect to take into consideration is 1) other folks are also cruising around with minimum limits, and 2) you can’t get Un(der)insured Motorist limits greater than your liability limits. For the pedants: unless you’ve got more than one car insured, both with UM, and your state allows stackingSo if you’re so certain of your abilities to drive safely that you’re totally cool with carrying minimum liability coverage, you’re STILL in danger of some dumbass blowing you out and having minimal-no way to pay for your medical bills, wage loss, permanent impairment, walkers, hot tub, seeing eye dogs, reiki therapy, etc. The real reason to carry $1.25 million in liability coverage is so you have the right to _protect yourself_ against massive injuries suffered by you and yours. That it might benefit someone you plow into should be a secondary concern. ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Tildrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e95f7d/32.png) [@Tom\_Tildrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Tildrum)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2015, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/insurance-company-suing/736465/22 "2015-11-04T19:54:06Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Florida, where **obbn** lives. The legislature recently adopted [a full no-fault system](http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0600-0699/0627/Sections/0627.736.html) so drivers are only required to have $10K in bodily coverage and $10K in property damage coverage for third parties. I think I’m confused about what that means. If it’s no-fault, then why is she being sued? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2015, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/insurance-company-suing/736465/23 "2015-11-04T20:02:49Z")
Sorry, “full” is a bit misleading there. It’s no-fault up to the $10K minimum coverage threshold. ---
**Author:** ![Habeed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a587f6/32.png) [@Habeed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Habeed)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2015, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/insurance-company-suing/736465/24 "2015-11-04T20:31:40Z")
So, if you were one of those judgement proof scumbags, how would you handle it? If you sent them a letter saying “I ain’t got nothin’ but pocket lint, go squeeze another stone for blood,” are they likely to go away, or will they pay the court costs, get a default judgement (if you have no assets you can’t afford an attorney) for a huge sum uncontested, and then hound you with debt collectors? ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2015, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/insurance-company-suing/736465/25 "2015-11-04T21:02:05Z")
> [@Habeed](#): > > So, if you were one of those judgement proof scumbags, how would you handle it? If you sent them a letter saying “I ain’t got nothin’ but pocket lint, go squeeze another stone for blood,” are they likely to go away, or will they pay the court costs, get a default judgement (if you have no assets you can’t afford an attorney) for a huge sum uncontested, and then hound you with debt collectors? Why is a person that is judgement proof automatically a ‘scumbag’ ? Other than that nitpick of your question - essentially that is what would happen - they would end up with a judgment against them, collections would ensue, credit reports damaged, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2015, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/insurance-company-suing/736465/26 "2015-11-05T01:36:44Z")
Unlikely. Not worth the lawyer’s time. ---
**Author:** ![Snnipe\_70E](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5a626/32.png) [@Snnipe\_70E](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snnipe_70E)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2015, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/insurance-company-suing/736465/27 "2015-11-05T05:14:23Z")
> [@The Great Sun Jester](#): > > Yep > > Even weirder, it’s generally ‘bad form’ for her insurer to write a $10k check to the other guy’s insurance and say, “Meh, go to her for the rest.” In excess cases like this I don’t pay the subrogation claim unless the other insurer agrees to leave my insured alone for the shortfall. > > At the very least her company owes her a defense. Should they not do that, your daughter can turn around and file a bad faith suit against her own insurance company for hanging her out to dry. She may already have grounds for that. > > But first things first: she should clue her insurance company to the fact she is being approached for the balance of the debt. At best, her company will provide an attorney to defend her in the “what is owed” matter. She may still need to get her own attorney to advise her about options for paying or bankrupting the debt.This is not my experience, but I don’t know every company’s policy in every state. I will say this is an incredibly poor business model in terms of customer service (hanging people out to dry is no way to keep customers) as well as needlessly exposing the company to bad faith suits from their screwed-over customers. I and my friends live in California. The lawyer is the insurance company lawyer. They are required to look out for the insurance company’s best interest. I know of several cases where the insurance company settled and paid out a full claim with out the customers consent. In one case one of the guys I worked with was T boned and sent to the hospital and his car was total. He had the green light. The guy who pulled him from his wreaked car stank of booze. I the law suit that he filed he found out that the guy who pulled him from the car was the other driver. After the accident the other driver filed a claim against Tom, the guy I worked with. They paid to replace the other driver’s car because he claimed Tom ran the light. Tom strongly objected and denied his insurance company the right to pay the claim. The insurance company paid anyway. And Tom was expected to pay the deductible to get his car replaced. Tom sued the other driver and got a judgment for the full replacement of his car. He was able to prove the other drive ran the light. My son girl friend backed his car in another car in a parking lot. Damaged the left rear fender. Just a small scratch. Called his insurance company and gave a full description of the damage. A few weeks later he received a letter from his insurance company stating the pay out was over $6,000. It appeared the other driver took his car to the body shop and had all the dents on both sides of his car repaired. Along with replacing both the front and back bumpers. The insurance company could not be bothered. Except to raise his rate because of the major claim. ---
**Author:** ![Inigo\_Montoya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inigo_montoya/32/124_2.png) [@Inigo\_Montoya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inigo_Montoya)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2015, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/insurance-company-suing/736465/28 "2015-11-13T20:37:00Z")
> [@Snnipe\_70E](#): > > I know of several cases where the insurance company settled and paid out a full claim with out the customers consent. Just wanted to point out, there is a difference between an insurer paying liability claims without the customer’s consent\*, and settling a claim without getting a release which protects the insured from further legal action.\*\* Yes. Sometimes claims are handled sloppily, and sometimes the company might err on the conservative side and settle a claim, only to have a jury come to a different conclusion when their customer pursues the other guy in court. But you know what about your example? Tom never got sued by the other driver–he got protected from that kind of action by his insurance company. Tom may not like the hundreds of bucks he had to pay for the deductible and possible rate hike, but I think it’s fair to say we’d REALLY be hearing about it if the other guy’s claims had been denied and Tom got sued and lost. - Actually, when you buy the policy you already are giving the company your consent to settle or deny any claims presented against your policy. It’s part of the contract. Look at your policy booklet in the “insuring agreement” of the “Liability” section. You’ll find verbiage to the effect of: “We have the right to investigate, negotiate, and settle any claim or lawsuit” brought against you/your policy. \*\* The whole purpose of insurance is to financially protect the policyholder from the trouble they’ve gotten into. Sometimes that means making a decision to pay a questionable claim if not doing so exposes the insured to an even greater financial loss. If that doesn’t sit will with you, see the previous point about authority to settle claims being part of the agreement. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/insurance-company-suing/736465.md?page=1)