Shopping on line can be easy, simple and save you lots of money. It can also take a lot of your time, frustrate you, and result in unwanted purchases. Now the same can be said for regular high street shopping, but with the vast opportunity presented by the Internet it will pay you to spend a few minutes reading this and understanding how to better optimize your No Fault Insurance shopping experience:
1. Compare - without doubt the biggest advantage that the No Fault Insurance offers shoppers today is the ability to compare thousands of No Fault Insurance at a time. This is a great thing, but not necessarily all the time! Too much can be daunting at times so take advantage of the great comparison sites and where possible let them do the hard work for you.
2. Research - if it has been said it will be on the internet. Ignorance is no longer a justifiable reason for buying the wrong thing. Take the time to research in detail everything that you could possible want to know about
3. Testimonials - don't know anybody that has bought a No Fault Insurance? Wrong! If the No Fault Insurance is good the internet will let you know. Use the Internet as a friend and get testimonials before you buy.
4. Questions - Got a question about No Fault Insurance then search the Forums, FAQ's, Blogs etc. Don't be afraid to ask .....
5. Reputation - Never heard of the company selling No Fault Insurance? Don't worry, no reason why you should know every company in the world, but you know someone that does! Use the internet to find out what people are saying about No Fault Insurance and build up a picture of their reputation for sales, returns, customer service, delivery etc.
6. Returns - still worried that even after all of the above your No Fault Insurance wont be what you want? Check out the returns policy. There is so much competition now that someone, somewhere is bound to offer the terms that you are comfortable with.
7. Feedback - happy with your No Fault Insurance then let people know, after all you are depending on others people input in your buying decision, so why not give a little back.
8. Security - check for the yellow padlock on the No Fault Insurance site before you buy, and the s after http:/ /i.e. https:// = a secure site
9. Contact - got a question about No Fault Insurance, or want to leave a comment then check out the sites contact page. Reputable companies have them and respond.
10. Payment - ready to pay for your No Fault Insurance, then use your credit card or PayPal! Be aware of companies that don't accept them, there may be genuine reasons but given the huge amount of choice you have when buying online there is no reason at all not to buy via credit card or PayPal.
No-fault insurance is a type of
insurance (typically automobile insurance) where insureds are indemnity by their own insurer regardless of fault in the incident. The term is often applied to any type of policy that allows for a policyholder to be reimbursed by their own insurer without proof of fault, but technically it refers only to state/provincial laws that not only allow for recovery of direct damage but also limit the right of the insured to sue.
Overview of No-fault insurance
Most United States states have a 'traditional tort' liability system for auto insurance where recovery is limited by negligence principles. However, 12 U.S. states and the Commonwealth (United States insular area) territory of Puerto Rico give drivers the option to operate under a "no fault" scheme where persons injured in automobile accidents are limited in their ability to sue other drivers or vehicle owners involved in an accident unless their injuries are particularly severe, sometimes referred to as the 'limited tort' option. The limited tort option provides for legal action only for bodily injury, not for property damage.
No-fault insurance allows for injured parties to sue for compensation for pain and suffering only in cases of exceptional severity. There are two definitions of "exceptional severity":
- The descriptive, or verbal threshold definition allows for the insured to define whether or not they have crossed a defined severity line. The advantage of the verbal threshold is that it removes any incentive to artificially inflate damage amounts to meet some preset monetary loss figure. The primary disadvantage is that broad interpretation by the courts of the threshold can lead to over-compensation.
- The monetary threshold sets a specific currency amount spent on medical bills before a tort is allowed. While this prevents over-compensation, it does sometimes lead to exaggeration of medical costs.
Also note that not all jurisdictions require that the insured use the no-fault system; in the United States, 3 of the the 12 states with no-fault allow the motorist to reject the threshold and sue. Rejection must be done at the time the policy is written or renewed; once the policy terms are set forth the insured may not change his/her mind without re-writing the policy.
No-fault insurance has the goal of lowering premium costs by avoiding litigation over the cause of the accident, while providing quick payment for injuries. However, critics of no-fault schemes note that it does not punish reckless or negligent drivers in
litigation (because many cases don't go to trial), and that it is particularly difficult to sue if a person's injuries leave them with a handicap. Proponents of no-fault insurance point out that auto accidents are inevitable and that at-fault drivers should therefore not necessarily be punished, and that the presence of liability insurance prevents at-fault drivers in tort (or fault) systems from perceiving the lawsuit against them as an incentive to take greater care. Additionally, in regions with high numbers of uninsured motorists, the at fault party often does not have resources to pay their liability, leaving the accident victim with no recourse.
Critics also point out that many no-fault auto insurance jurisdictions have among the highest auto insurance premiums in the country, although no-fault systems tend to be more popular in areas with higher automobile accident risk.
Several US states have experimented with and repealed their no-fault laws. 24 states originally enacted no-fault laws in some form between 1970 and 1975. Colorado repealed its no-fault system in 2003. Florida's no-fault system is set to sunset on October 1, 2007.
In at least one state, New York, the no-fault plan suddenly and unexpectedly led to an enormous flood of litigation beginning around 1995 and continuing unabated to date (2007). As documented by the New York State Insurance Department and by New York's Court of Appeals, a billion-dollar-a-year "no fault fraud industry" has emerged, in which large numbers of people -- mostly immigrants -- are recruited by criminal "rings" to pile into automobiles which are then involved in deliberate or "staged" accidents. The "victims" are then referred to compliant "medical clinics" which supply unnecessary, questionable or redundant treatment and/or medical supplies. Medical bills are sent en masse to no-fault insurers, and when payment is denied, suit is commenced by a number of law firms which apparently specialize in just this kind of claim.
In 2002, the New York State Insurance Department amended the no-fault regulations to shorten the time period in which claims must be reported, from 90 days to 30 days; the new regulations also reduced the time in which medical bills must be submitted to insurers, from 180 days after treatment, to 45 days. According to the Insurance Department, these revised regulations have helped to reduce the number of fraudulent claims.
Nevertheless, no-fault litigation is reported to constitute 25% of all lawsuits filed in the New York City Civil Court.
States/Provinces with No-Fault Laws
:Quebec
:Ontario
:
Florida
:Michigan
:
New Jersey
:New York
:
Pennsylvania
:
Saskatchewan
:Manitoba
:Hawaii
:
Kansas
:
Kentucky
:
Massachusetts
:Minnesota
:North Dakota
:Utah
:Saskatchewan
:
New Jersey
:
Pennsylvania
:
Kentucky
See also
External links
- Saskatchewan Government Insurance, Press Release - Choices in Auto Insurance.
References
- Insurance Information Institute
- Jost, K. (1992, May 22). Too many lawsuits?. CQ Researcher, 2, 433-456
- Randall R. Bovbjerg & Frank A. Sloan, No-Fault For Medical Injury: Theory and Evidence, 67 U. Cin. L. Rev. 53 (1998)
No-fault insurance is a type of insurance (typically
automobile insurance) where
insureds are
indemnity by their own insurer regardless of fault in the incident. The term is often applied to any type of policy that allows for a policyholder to be reimbursed by their own insurer without proof of fault, but technically it refers only to state/provincial laws that not only allow for recovery of direct damage but also limit the right of the insured to sue.
Overview of No-fault insurance
Most
United States states have a 'traditional
tort' liability system for auto insurance where recovery is limited by negligence principles. However, 12 U.S. states and the
Commonwealth (United States insular area) territory of
Puerto Rico give drivers the option to operate under a "no fault" scheme where persons injured in automobile accidents are limited in their ability to sue other drivers or
vehicle owners involved in an accident unless their injuries are particularly severe, sometimes referred to as the 'limited tort' option. The limited tort option provides for legal action only for bodily injury, not for property damage.
No-fault insurance allows for injured parties to sue for compensation for pain and suffering only in cases of exceptional severity. There are two definitions of "exceptional severity":
- The descriptive, or verbal threshold definition allows for the insured to define whether or not they have crossed a defined severity line. The advantage of the verbal threshold is that it removes any incentive to artificially inflate damage amounts to meet some preset monetary loss figure. The primary disadvantage is that broad interpretation by the courts of the threshold can lead to over-compensation.
- The monetary threshold sets a specific currency amount spent on medical bills before a tort is allowed. While this prevents over-compensation, it does sometimes lead to exaggeration of medical costs.
Also note that not all jurisdictions require that the insured use the no-fault system; in the United States, 3 of the the 12 states with no-fault allow the motorist to reject the threshold and sue. Rejection must be done at the time the policy is written or renewed; once the policy terms are set forth the insured may not change his/her mind without re-writing the policy.
No-fault insurance has the goal of lowering premium costs by avoiding litigation over the cause of the accident, while providing quick payment for injuries. However, critics of no-fault schemes note that it does not punish reckless or negligent drivers in litigation (because many cases don't go to trial), and that it is particularly difficult to sue if a person's injuries leave them with a handicap. Proponents of no-fault insurance point out that auto accidents are inevitable and that at-fault drivers should therefore not necessarily be punished, and that the presence of
liability insurance prevents at-fault drivers in tort (or fault) systems from perceiving the lawsuit against them as an incentive to take greater care. Additionally, in regions with high numbers of uninsured motorists, the at fault party often does not have resources to pay their liability, leaving the accident victim with no recourse.
Critics also point out that many no-fault auto insurance jurisdictions have among the highest auto insurance premiums in the country, although no-fault systems tend to be more popular in areas with higher automobile accident risk.
Several US states have experimented with and repealed their no-fault laws. 24 states originally enacted no-fault laws in some form between 1970 and 1975.
Colorado repealed its no-fault system in 2003. Florida's no-fault system is set to sunset on October 1, 2007.
In at least one state, New York, the no-fault plan suddenly and unexpectedly led to an enormous flood of litigation beginning around 1995 and continuing unabated to date (2007). As documented by the New York State Insurance Department and by New York's Court of Appeals, a billion-dollar-a-year "no fault fraud industry" has emerged, in which large numbers of people -- mostly immigrants -- are recruited by criminal "rings" to pile into automobiles which are then involved in deliberate or "staged" accidents. The "victims" are then referred to compliant "medical clinics" which supply unnecessary, questionable or redundant treatment and/or medical supplies. Medical bills are sent en masse to no-fault insurers, and when payment is denied, suit is commenced by a number of law firms which apparently specialize in just this kind of claim.
In 2002, the New York State Insurance Department amended the no-fault regulations to shorten the time period in which claims must be reported, from 90 days to 30 days; the new regulations also reduced the time in which medical bills must be submitted to insurers, from 180 days after treatment, to 45 days. According to the Insurance Department, these revised regulations have helped to reduce the number of fraudulent claims.
Nevertheless, no-fault litigation is reported to constitute 25% of all lawsuits filed in the New York City Civil Court.
States/Provinces with No-Fault Laws
:
Quebec
:
Ontario
:Florida
:Michigan
:New Jersey
:
New York
:
Pennsylvania
:
Saskatchewan
:
Manitoba
:Hawaii
:
Kansas
:Kentucky
:Massachusetts
:
Minnesota
:
North Dakota
:
Utah
:Saskatchewan
:
New Jersey
:Pennsylvania
:Kentucky
See also
External links
- Saskatchewan Government Insurance, Press Release - Choices in Auto Insurance.
References
- Insurance Information Institute
- Jost, K. (1992, May 22). Too many lawsuits?. CQ Researcher, 2, 433-456
- Randall R. Bovbjerg & Frank A. Sloan, No-Fault For Medical Injury: Theory and Evidence, 67 U. Cin. L. Rev. 53 (1998)
No-fault insurance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In it broadest sense, no-fault insurance is a term used to describe any type of insurance contract under which insureds are indemnified for losses by their own insurance company ...
no-fault insurance definition of no-fault insurance in the Free Online ...
no-fault insurance, type of indemnity plan, usually applied to automobile coverage, in which those injured in an accident receive direct payment from the company with which they ...
Legal Glossary - N
no-fault insurance: nol. pros. nolle prosequi: nolo: nolo contendere: nominal damages ... Legal Research: How to Find & Understand the Law Sale Price: $26.99 ePrice: $24.99
no-fault auto insurance - What does NFAI stand for? Acronyms and ...
Acronym Definition; NFAI: National Film Archive of India: NFAI: National Film Archive of Iran: NFAI: National Fine Arts Institute (Mexico) NFAI: National Food Animal Identification
No Fault (insurance) - What does NF stand for? Acronyms and ...
Acronym Definition; NF: Air Vanuatu Limited (IATA airline code) NF: Nanofarad: NF: Nanofiber: NF: Nanofiltration: NF: National Fine (screw thread, Society of Automotive Engineers)
III - No-Fault Auto Insurance
THE TOPIC JULY 2008 The term "no-fault" auto insurance is often used loosely to denote any auto insurance program that allows policyholders to recover financial losses from their ...
no-fault insurance. The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001-07
no-fault insurance. The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001-07 ... type of indemnity plan, usually applied to automobile coverage, in which those injured in an accident ...
no fault automobile insurance - definition of no fault automobile ...
Noun: 1. no fault automobile insurance - a system of automobile insurance where a party who is injured in an automobile accident recovers damages up to a specific amount against ...
no fault insurance - definition of no fault insurance by the Free ...
Noun: 1. no fault insurance - a system of automobile insurance where a party who is injured in an automobile accident recovers damages up to a specific amount against his own ...
The New York Law Journal - No-Fault Insurance Wrap-Up
Law.com state and regional resources provide you with local and national news, cases and developments
