On my XJS Insurance (nearly sorted out) I have got the option of 'Legal Protection' but do I really need it?

In the event of an Accident, whether my fault or not, I would 'Imagine' that my Insurance Company, would defend any Claim to avoid paying out.

Where according to the Policy, I am obliged to leave this to them and not get involved myself.

Which I think is a fairly Standard Set of Terms and Conditions.

So why would I need to pay for Legal Protection?

Am I just throwing money down the drain?

 

My understanding of the insurer-insured relationship is about the same as yours. That is, to a certain extent at least, the insurance company represents you and your interests......so long as doing so doesn't needlessly jeopardize their interests.

I ask what * specific * additional protections are being provided for the extra expense.


Cheers
DD

 

OB,

I think it's fairly easy to get a list of the benefits that are provided through having legal expenses cover. For example, I think it includes recovery of your insurance excess in the event of no-blame accident; representing you in legal claim by third-parties against you; representing you for damages claims by you other than damage to your car in the event of non-blame accident etc

Paul

 

Hi Doug

I was wondering the very same thing myself but PTJS has just come up with something interesting.

 

Hi Paul

'representing you in legal claim by third-parties against you'

You may have just nailed it with that.

So I am going to ask them what they are going to provide for this extra money.

 

It could be to cover legal expenses if someone is suing above and beyond your insurance coverage. Say someone dies your fault and you are covered for only 100,000.00 then they also sue you for personal attachments, your house,property,future income, etc.

Back in 1973 I was 15 years old. I was a passenger in a car that pulled out in front of another car on a highway broke both my legs "femurs' in traction spread eagle 3 months and then in a body cast spread eagle for 3 more months had to learn to walk again anyway my friend only had 5/10/5 ins. My Mom worked at Uniroyal tire manufacturer her ins paid for all ambulance, Hospital, doctor, medications, physical therapy, etc I remember back in 73 my Mom saying in the neighborhood of over 500,000.00 her ins paid out and the company provided ins she had ,my parents were not out a dime. I collected 5,000.00 from my friends ins and bought my first car a 68 camaro. We could have sued his parents for everything they had and would ever have but did not, by the way my friend broke his left femur in the same location as mine so we were both in traction in the same room for 3 months. I have no idea how they paid for his care and also the care of the 2 other people in the other car and this is weird but it was a head on and both vehicles were Volkswagen beetles.

 

I would thing this question is best put top your insurance agent, I would ignore any comments from the U.S., as our insurance concepts may be different that those in the U.K.


As an attorney with almost 40 years of insurance litigation, I have no idea what your "legal protection" means. We don't use that term here.

 

Hi Mac

That is very suddenly making lots of sense to me, as if you don't have that legal Protection and something bad happens.

Then your Insurance may only pay for the damage to the Vehicle/s, after which they may decide to step out of the ring, with regard to any further Claims.

I've always thought the option to have Legal Protection was a rip off but after what you've just told me, now I'm not so sure and so for the sake of £16 its probably well worth having after all.

 

Hi Rob

What Mac has just told me makes a lot of sense and seems to be very relevant, to the way that our Insurance works in the UK.

Now Mac has given me the 'heads up' I'll also try and get a bit more information from the Insurance Company, which may help other people as well as myself.

 

I don't know how the ins in the UK works I'm just stating how it works in the USA. I do not want to offend anyone. In the US you have variable coverage the higher coverage the better, I have 5 hundred thousand/1 million/5 hundred thousand and if a death still not enough.
Find out exactly what there payout is and all coverage,make sure you are covered.

 

You also have to take into account what are the odds of a accident of that magnitude ? My dad of 84 years canceled his home ins after pay off 30 years ago, I ask him why, he said " They insure me betting I will not need it "

 

I agree, insurance in the UK and the USA probably similar but the language differs.


In my 50 years, I did not have the honor of crossing swords with Rob,
or perhaps, I did!!!


Here, I offer the following


Liability. Pay all sums for which the insured may become legally obligated to pay. The insurer insists on determing that and resisiting the claim/suit or settling it. Covers both bodily injury and property
damage. That might be termed "Legal Protection" in the UK.
This is mandatory in most if not all states here.


Collsion. Covers the insured's car for damage by being hit or hitting something. A deductible apples. The insurer may seek recovery from a responsible party. by custom, if it succeeds, it includes the deductible and returns it.


Comprehensive: A form of all risk less exclusions. Theft, vandalism,. fire, and glass. Once no deductible involved, now one usually is.


Medical Payments: All reasonable and necessary medical expense of those injured in or about the insured car. A time limit as wellas a monetary limit.


Umbrella coverage. Added coverage over and above all liability insurance (Legal Protection).


Un insured or under insured motorist. In effect, Ones insurance company steps in in place of the other party and settles and/or defends. Most ornerous to me in my day. Had to treat my insured as an adversary.


But, I have two suggestions:


1. Confer with the broker. Unfortunately, some understand their product better than others. Some are mere sales persons.


2. Read the entire policy, line by line....


Carl

 

Gentlemen;


Carl laid out the coverages nicely. Understanding the details of how they apply is complex and may vary from state to state.


I would offer a caveat to the suggestion that you read the policy. Yes you have an obligation to read the policy to make sure the coverages you asked for are present. However once you have read it don't assume that you know what it all means; because you do not.


I dealt with insurance claims people who made coverage decisions based on their interpretations for what certain words in the policy meant. Unfortunately our courts disagreed with them.


I'm not trying to scare anyone here. Your agent understands the basics and should get you the protection you need. If you have more sophisticated needs than average, you should find a more sophisticated agent.

 

There's a somewhat different structure and legal requirement here in the UK, which is where OB lives.

All car drivers have to have "Third Party" Insurance. This is the simplest (and previously cheapest) form of car insurance. If you cause an accident, the Third Party ie the person / car that you hit, can then claim for damages from your insurance policy. You have to sort out the damage on your own car from your own pocket.

The next level is "Third Party, Fire & Theft". This adds two situations under which you can claim for the costs of your car if stolen or set on fire.

The top level is "Fully Comprehensive". Under this policy, you and your car (& passengers) are covered irrespective of who caused the accident.

The issues often arise when you are trying to prove that the accident isn't your fault such that your insurance company can recover the money that they've paid to you, from the other party's insurance company. This is really crucial in trying not to have a poor insurance record. An accident in which all your costs were recovered from the other party has an enormous beneficial impact on your future premiums compared to an accident in which your insurance company had to pay out (either to you or to a third party). An accident that is "blame-free" or "all costs recovered" still stay son your record but doesn't have a major impact. Any accident where your insurance company pays out (and can't recover it) is bad news for your future insurance premium.

Paul

 

Rob:


Absolutely correct on interpretation. I took pride in reading the policies and interpreting them. Did i always get it right? No. Most of the time. I think so. Auto policies are the simplist.


General Liability, especialy commercial far more complex. and thusly
far more interesting/fun. "Work done by and for the named insured" !!!


I have been retired for ten years, but in a way I miss "saddling up and going out to the wars"!!


Carl

 

Hi Carl

Thanks for your suggestion, I will definitely read the 'Small Print' very carefully.

I also dropped an email to the Broker this morning but as yet they haven't come back with any answers to my questions.

 

Hi Rob

Thanks and I will take your advice and proceed with caution.

 

You summed that up very nicely Paul

Many Thanks

 

Hi Carl

Insurance can be a pretty complex Subject and as far as Car Insurance goes, there does appear to be, lots of Bear Traps you can fall into.

If only there were Standard Terms and Conditions for all Companies, then may be we would have a better idea of what we were doing.

 

Lots of good advice already given.
Allow me to offer my personal and somewhat sceptical alternative view on all insurance including car cover.
I once believed naively that insurance companies provided a service to protect the insured from financial losses incurred due to accident/fire/theft.
My view is more sceptical, bordering on cynical.
Insurance companies are businesses that aim to make a profit by offering for sale products (insurance coverage) at prices that maximise income , by seeking to convince you that more cover equals better cover, then if a claim situation occurs they employ 'loss adjusters' who seek to minimise the payout.
They are not beyond seeking to manipulate purchasing decisions by trying to instill fear of 'what if' scenarios.

Each year I insure my car, each successive year I don't claim I am notified that my "no claims discount" has been increased as a consequence of being a lower risk, yet each year the renewal premium required for cover increases.

Not suggesting you follow my lead of not giving in to the fear factor, but merely giving an alternative opinion to consider.