Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site lsuc.UUCP Path: utzoo!lsuc!msb From: msb@lsuc.UUCP (Mark Brader) Newsgroups: net.legal,net.auto Subject: Uninsured motorism Message-ID: <748@lsuc.UUCP> Date: Sat, 10-Aug-85 13:58:43 EDT Article-I.D.: lsuc.748 Posted: Sat Aug 10 13:58:43 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 10-Aug-85 14:22:59 EDT References: <202@SCIRTP.UUCP> <378@kontron.UUCP> <586@ttidcc.UUCP> Reply-To: msb@lsuc.UUCP (Mark Brader) Distribution: net Organization: Law Society of Upper Canada, Toronto Lines: 37 Summary: There should be insurance against uninsured motorists > > What if you or I were hit by an uninsured driver? > > We could tally huge medical bills with no means > > to pay for them. I think you can never confiscate > > someone's automobile liability insurance because > > others will often suffer the most. > > Which brings up an important point. This can happen to you > NOW! My attorney has handled many cases where > innocent people were severely injured by uninsured drivers > and were unable to collect. ... Which suggests that, in jurisdictions where motorists are allowed not to have insurance (that's most of them in North America, isn't it?), insurance companies should sell policies that protect you not only against your own liability but also against that of the uninsured driver who runs into you. In other words, suppose I collide with J, and J is at fault, and I suffer serious injuries; then J's insurance might have to pay me, say, $250,000. But if J is uninsured, J merely owes me that money, and since he can only pay $5,000, I'm out $245,000 (minus what my particular government chips in), and J declares bankruptcy or something. Under my proposal, my own insurance, although primarily for the purpose of paying J if I had been at fault, would pay me the $250,000 in this case. J gets the same treatment as before, because he still owes $250,000 -- only now he owes it to my insurer, not me. So there my proposal does not confer any benefit to J, but does to me -- at a cost of a slightly higher premium. I say slightly higher because most drivers *are* insured, so the risk of this is small. I favor mandatory liability insurance for drivers, but this seems to be a workable alternative. I've never heard of such policies actually existing anywhere. Do they? Mark Brader