insurance scam!

[PoorManQ45]

so, my mother just got a call from her insurance company.

it is time for her to renew her policy. she went to remove me from her insurance. they told her that she can not remove me without proof that I no longer live in the house.

what the hell is that crap? I don't drive a car. I have a motorcycle which does not require insurance. I do not drive any of their vehicles.

how can a company force you into paying for their service?

[tigersharkdude]

its a scam. Call their corporate

[Jesda]

In response she should cancel her policy and tell them to eat a d!ck.

[scotty-2-forty]

so, my mother just got a call from her insurance company.

it is time for her to renew her policy. she went to remove me from her insurance. they told her that she can not remove me without proof that I no longer live in the house.

what the hell is that crap? I don't drive a car. I have a motorcycle which does not require insurance. I do not drive any of their vehicles.

how can a company force you into paying for their service?

Not a scam. If you are a licensed driver regardless of what you drive (ride) and live in the same household, the insurance company rightfully assumes that you have access to the said vehicles in the household. This is why insurance companies ask up front if there are any other "licensed" drivers living in the same house that may or may not be on the policy.

[Jesda]

They still cant force her. Just cancel the policy and tell them why.

[scotty-2-forty]

They still cant force her. Just cancel the policy and tell them why.

What's the point? She's just going to have to redo another policy in the same manner unless she lies and says there is no other licensed drivers in the house. It sucks, but hey it's the land in which we live.

[Jesda]

Not every insurer is going to jack up the premiums for having another driver in the home. This one apparently does, so dump them.

[PoorManQ45]

so, my mother just got a call from her insurance company.

it is time for her to renew her policy. she went to remove me from her insurance. they told her that she can not remove me without proof that I no longer live in the house.

what the hell is that crap? I don't drive a car. I have a motorcycle which does not require insurance. I do not drive any of their vehicles.

how can a company force you into paying for their service?

Not a scam. If you are a licensed driver regardless of what you drive (ride) and live in the same household, the insurance company rightfully assumes that you have access to the said vehicles in the household. This is why insurance companies ask up front if there are any other "licensed" drivers living in the same house that may or may not be on the policy.

by that same "rightful assumption " anyone that comes into the house has access the vehicles.

that makes no sense!

[MinisterofDOOM]

by that same "rightful assumption " anyone that comes into the house has access the vehicles.

that makes no sense!

I'm going to have to do some Hail Marys, but I'm going to agree with PMQ here.

I'm sure the Magic Insurance Math adds up somehow, or they wouldn't do it that way, but it just seems silly. Case in point:

My mom, dad, grandpa, and I all drive each others' cars on a regular basis. We live in different houses.
My roommate and I are both licensed drivers in the same house. Neither of us ever drives the other's car.

It has NOTHING to do with where the drivers live. It has everything to do with whether they're comfortable letting each other drive their cars.

[scotty-2-forty]

Insurance in and of itself IS a scam .

However, it does not negate the fact that if you are a licensed driver claiming homestead to the house in which your mother lives she must legally list you as a licensed driver living in the same home. If you lived on your own in another residence then she could remove you at which point the insurance company cannot be held liable anymore for you as a driver in that house. If she loans you the car at that point, the liability falls on her to ensure that you have your own insurance to cover your person, or in that she knows you are not insured and takes full legal responsibility for her car and what you do with it. That is why they are asking for proof of not living there. It's all a liability issue. I know insurance coverage varies state-to-state ... I am only basing this on what I know of being a licensed driver in the state of Florida for the past 29 years, and having 3 teenagers all going through obtaining their driver permits/licenses in the past 6 months.

[DudeZ]

brien, you live in a state that requires drivers to be insured, therefore there are extra precautions that insurance companies must take in order to abide by state laws. to add to what scotty-2-forty said, some insurance companies will go as far as to confirm with your new policy holder that you are completely insured, before allowing you to drop from their insurance policy.

[Dattebayo]

lol

Any of you stating that the insurance company is in the right here are a bunch of dumb fu*king animals.
The company does not have the right to charge for all persons in the household, regardless of what their "policy" dictates. I don't know why people allow companies to d!ck them around with any kind of policy in this day and age with the sheer number of options you have.

Those who said dump the company are absolutely right. And make sure to report them to your state insurance authority.

[scotty-2-forty]

lol

Any of you stating that the insurance company is in the right here are a bunch of dumb fu*king animals.

Thanks. Very much appreciated. Some of us "dumb fu*king animals" are simply stating facts based on our own experience, which in my case is in Florida.

[Eikon]

lol

Any of you stating that the insurance company is in the right here are a bunch of dumb fu*king animals.

Funny, I never knew you were a lawyer in the field of auto insurance? Or perhaps you are an exec with a major auto insurance carrier? Or maybe you just got your JD from a major university with an emphasis in insurance law?

Or maybe I'm wrong on all of the above and you are actually just sharing your own personal, unproven and relatively uneducated opinion on this topic.

If the former is correct, then you probably have a right to pass judgment on the rest of the group for their misinformed opinions.
If the latter is correct, then you are the dumb animal for using such abrasive language to share an opinion that is no better than the rest.

[scotty-2-forty]

lol

Any of you stating that the insurance company is in the right here are a bunch of dumb fu*king animals.

Thanks. Very much appreciated. Some of us "dumb fu*king animals" are simply stating facts based on our own experience, which in my case is in Florida.

I will add to this, I do not know if an insurance agent can charge you a higher premium based on the simple fact that you have licensed drivers living with you. My question to PMQ is: Are you listed simply as a licensed driver in the household on her policy, or are you actually insured on her policy? That could make a big difference too.

[tigersharkdude]

They still cant force her. Just cancel the policy and tell them why.

What's the point? She's just going to have to redo another policy in the same manner unless she lies and says there is no other licensed drivers in the house. It sucks, but hey it's the land in which we live.

There are 4 licensed drivers in my house: my mom, brother and his fiance, and myself

my mom and I are both on each others insurance but thats because I drive her car and she drives mine occasionally. My brother is no where on her auto insurance

EDIT: state minimum coverage is liability.....all drivers must have insurance. But as stated I am the only person that my mother lists on her insurance. So there are 2 other people in our house that are NOT listed on her plan

[Eikon]

I won't claim to be an expert on insurance, but I do know this.. Insurance policies and premiums are an assessment of risk of payout. Insurers may set up policy types based on risk levels. Clearly the risk of a mature woman living alone is less than that of a mature woman living with a young adult male in the house with her. Since it is legal for the young adult to take the mother's car out of the house, the insurance company has to adjust for that risk. That adjustment may disqualify the mother from the risk level that she would otherwise qualify for. So, in this instance, the insurer may require evidence to prove the risk level is low.. in this instance, proof that the young adult male no longer lives in that home.

Insurance is not a right bestowed by the constitution, so there is no law that says a company must insure an applicant. They can lay out the groundrules that they deem necessary to qualify the risk. If the applicant chooses not to follow through they are more than free to seek insurance from another carrier. Perhaps another carrier will assess the risk level by different criteria.

So.. Jesda is right on... If PMQ's mom doesn't like the request or doesn't want to comply, then she can feel free to take her business elsewhere. If enough people make that call, perhaps the insurance carrier will learn that it is a poor business practice and change their policy.

[scotty-2-forty]

There are 4 licensed drivers in my house: my mom, brother and his fiance, and myself

my mom and I are both on each others insurance but thats because I drive her car and she drives mine occasionally. My brother is no where on her auto insurance

EDIT: state minimum coverage is liability.....all drivers must have insurance. But as stated I am the only person that my mother lists on her insurance. So there are 2 other people in our house that are NOT listed on her plan

Did your mother have to show proof of your brother's and fiance's insurance? I'm sure this may be different from FL seeing as you're in TN, but I'm curious as risk assessment for the insurance company would be prudent and smart (for the agency) at that point.

[scotty-2-forty]

So.. Jesda is right on... If PMQ's mom doesn't like the request or doesn't want to comply, then she can feel free to take her business elsewhere.

Yes he is. But if it were me, I'd just do a little more research before taking that route. In other words, look into if it's a state requirement, or simply a profit building tool.

If enough people make that call, perhaps the insurance carrier will learn that it is a poor business practice and change their policy.

... and no it wont.

[Dattebayo]

Funny, I never knew you were a lawyer in the field of auto insurance? Or perhaps you are an exec with a major auto insurance carrier? Or maybe you just got your JD from a major university with an emphasis in insurance law?

Or maybe I'm wrong on all of the above and you are actually just sharing your own personal, unproven and relatively uneducated opinion on this topic.

If the former is correct, then you probably have a right to pass judgment on the rest of the group for their misinformed opinions.
If the latter is correct, then you are the dumb animal for using such abrasive language to share an opinion that is no better than the rest.

You don't have to be a lawyer to know that they cannot charge you if you don't drive. And if you don't use your head and let companies walk all over you, then you are a dumb fu*king animal. Maybe you don't like my presentation or opinion, but it's there to get people to actually think and speak up rather then roll over and let some company charge you without warrant.

[Encryptshun]

Dattebayo can be seen signing copies of his new book "How to Win Friends and Influence People" at the Avenue M Barnes & Noble on Saturday.

[Encryptshun]

Okay, so one of my good buddies works for a major insurance company. I asked him about this, and here is his reply:

As far as I know, it does not vary by state (one of the very few things actually), but all you would have to do is call up your agent/company (depending on how you get your insurance) and request to exclude the driver. Now, if for some reason they are home and driving your vehicle and have a loss, then that would not be covered. But once they are excluded, you should see your rate come down.

If this is a child, then it should be easy to exclude. You don’t have to prove coverage elsewhere, but just remember, you effectively don’t have coverage if they crash your car. Now, if they do have coverage of their own, then that should help alleviate any issues if they are driving your car.

[Dattebayo]

Yep. Maybe you wish to cross examine ^his friend's credentials as well? Or should we just assume he knows what he's saying like I said I did?

[scotty-2-forty]

You don't have to be a lawyer to know that they cannot charge you if you don't drive. And if you don't use your head and let companies walk all over you, then you are a dumb fu*king animal. Maybe you don't like my presentation or opinion, but it's there to get people to actually think and speak up rather then roll over and let some company charge you without warrant.

PMQ does not have to be charged, nor carry auto insurance if he in fact does not own an automobile or have a valid and current auto tag. However, being as he is a "licensed" driver capable of driving his mother's car, then the insurance agent can and will (due to risk assessement or law, according to state regulations) charge her on her premium accordingly. Does she have to pay it? Maybe; depends on the state and/or agency. Can she shop for another agent and/or carrier? Yeppers.

Your attitude SUCKS as reflected in how you join in with such abruptness and belligerence. And no I don't like your presentation or opinon here ... and so beit that is MY opinion. I also don't really need it to "actually think and speak up rather then roll over and let some company charge [me] without warrant." I'm a grown boy, but thanks anyway!

Jeez man, somebody piss in your Corn Flakes this morning? Need a hug??

[Dattebayo]

No. That's not how it works in this case. I'm sorry you don't understand that scotty, old pal...

My attitude sucks because of people who allow this kind of crap to continue. It also sucks because you think there's some law that lets it happen, yet I am burdened here with proof to show it doesn't? LOL Thanks for caring in some small way, tho.

[Jesda]

Speaking of cereal and bladder discharge, Honey Nut Cheerios already smell like they've been pissed in. Over the years the formula changed. I wrote a complaint to General Mills and they replied by offering me coupons for free cereal, which I spent on the awful yogurt Cheerios.

The only decent Cheerios left are the original plain version.

[Dattebayo]

Regular cheerios in whole milk or 2% is the bomb.

[Encryptshun]

PMQ does not have to be charged, nor carry auto insurance if he in fact does not own an automobile or have a valid and current auto tag.

True ONLY if he lives in a state which does not mandate insurance.

However, being as he is a "licensed" driver capable of driving his mother's car, then the insurance agent can and will (due to risk assessement or law, according to state regulations) charge her on her premium accordingly.

False. She only pays for individuals listed on her policy. There is no risk to the insurance company if the driver does not have insurance!

Does she have to pay it? Maybe; depends on the state and/or agency.

False. She does NOT have to pay for anyone she does not want to cover on her policy.

Can she shop for another agent and/or carrier? Yeppers.

True.

[Jesda]

[scotty-2-forty]

No. That's not how it works in this case. I'm sorry you don't understand that scotty, old pal...

My attitude sucks because of people who allow this kind of crap to continue. It also sucks because you think there's some law that lets it happen, yet I am burdened here with proof to show it doesn't? LOL Thanks for caring in some small way, tho.

How what works? You're right, I don't understand what you're talking about here. I never stated that by law this kind of thing has to happen and you must pay it. In fact, I clearly stated that this kind of thing 'might' vary state-to-state (because I do not know ... God forbid), and that it may also be up to that state's insurance regulation OR maybe within the freedom of the individual insurance agencies. I also agree that PMQ's mom has the right to drop that carrier and/or agent and shop elsewhere. Albeit, I think I put it in a bit more user friendly and polite manner than you. Sorry if we're "burdening" you, but I guess I'll chalk that up to your own pleasure in pain. LOL Your attitude sucks because YOU let it ... quit blaming others.

I only care because we share a common denominator here ... we frequent these boards.