Felix Ungman wrote:
> on 00-05-24 07.47, phil osborn at philosborn@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> How do you suggest conflicts between two people with different providers
> >> should be solved?
> >>
> >> /kpj
> >> _____________________________________________________________________________
> >> __
> > Who owns the roads??? Whoever provides the roads sets the policy re
> > insurance - or can if they choose, and they probably will, as otherwise they
> > might either find themselves stuck in ligigation or without customers.
>
> There are a number of different roles in this case, the drivers, the road
> owners, the car owners, and the insurers of the drivers, roads and cars.
> Each insurer sets its own policy, of course. But I think KPJ was asking what
> happens in case where there are incompatible policies. One extreme example
> would be if a driver who has no insurance at all is responsible for a
> substantial amount of damage (way above what he can compensate for).
Most people have clauses on their policies to cover in the event of an uninsured
motorist. Here in NH its quite typical, because you are not legally required to have
car insurance unless you've been in an accident with x amount of damage before, been
busted for DWI. Otherwise, insurance is usually mandated by the institution that
finances your vehicle purchase. If you paid cash for your car, and you have a clean
record, you have no legal obligation to be insured. Because of this, uninsured
motorist clauses are common, though I imagine they might not be in regions with no
states that have laws similar to ours.
The situation here in NH is much as I would expect in a libertarian society, where
those that are insured would have clauses on their policies to cover in the event of
an incident of some sort with an uninsured entity. I'm sure that in such a
situation, like an accident the uninsured driver cannot pay for, you would wind up
with the cost being financed, and a lein put on the future earnings of the
individual. Such leins would be part of the credit record of the individual, and
employers with their own insurance policies would be obligated by their insurance
company to comply with garnishment orders.
Any accidents where the damage exceeded the ability of an uninsured individual to
pay for in their lifetime would likely be the sort of accidents that insurance
companies would pay to research ways of minimizing with new technologies.
Mike Lorrey
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:11:37 MDT