Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
Liking the cap is not siding with billion dollar insurance companies. Its siding with lower rates for a lower level of coverage. Insurance is competitive enough that the rate is essentially what they pay out plus 10%. So removing the rate cap just raises rates for everyone.
|
My dislike of the cap has nothing to do with billion dollar insurance companies.
If you and I suffer an identical injury as the result of another's negligence, and both effected in the same way (ie: duration of injury and treatment), yet the only difference is mechanism/cause of injury our injuries can be worth different amounts.
For example, if you get rear ended and suffer a WAD 2 injury to you neck/back, and I suffer the same injury as a result of an elevator malfunction the possible awards are not the same. An injury suffered in a MVC is capped, an injury suffered in a non-MVC incident in not capped.
I think that is wrong.