Posts by Frank Walker7

Basically, if the paperwork says you've lost your coverage rights, you're still on the hook to pay before things go into subrogation, but if it explicitly states an exclusion, then there’s no payment required.

As for interest, I think it really just comes down to whatever was agreed upon upfront; if someone decides to dodge a payment and ends up getting sued, they'll likely end up covering the legal fees along with the interest too.

Hannah Allen5 said:You’re looking at amounts that are basically *1000 times higher than what you think.

I guess it applies to everyone who got hurt in the car accident, assuming there’s actually a legal basis to demand a payout—like if the insured driver was clearly at fault, maybe because they were driving like a maniac, cruising without a license, or being totally reckless by driving on summer tires in a blizzard or something like that.

The claim gets paid, but then the insurance company goes after the driver for reimbursement up to the amount of 12 average US salaries, at least for the scenarios you mentioned.

Hannah Allen5 said:I mean, I think there are plenty of instances where things went sideways with either the USA or Allianz, or maybe cases where HOK, Source, Agram, or some other player really dropped the ball—and vice versa, of course—but honestly, that’s less about the insurance itself and more about whoever is sitting in the chair deciding whether or not to approve a claim.

On top of that, the extra passenger coverage only kicks in for death or permanent disability. For any other kind of injury, you're stuck with a cap of about $6 million for bodily injury! I don't think anyone has ever actually managed to explain to me what the point of this extra coverage even is, or why we're even debating the moral dilemma of whether or not to sign up for it. If someone dies, your insurance pays out maybe $3 million to their heirs. Or if they end up with a 20% disability, it pays out maybe $600k 😕

There are definitely examples out there, but if you look at the percentages, one side clearly takes the lead... so I wouldn't necessarily say it comes down to the individual adjuster; I highly doubt anyone would let an employee go rogue like that, whether they're being too helpful or too difficult.

The extra insurance is just that—an add-on. It can be a nice little thing to have, and banks sell it alongside checking accounts and everything else, but some people still insist it's a mandatory necessity when, in reality, it's pretty much irrelevant.

Jesse Doyle3 said:We were discussing "normal" circumstances, given that most policyholders skip passenger insurance simply to save money. It’s true what you said—it isn't right that people get screwed over because of $67, but that's just the reality of it.
However, you have a point: if AO is included along with passenger insurance, then the reputation of the provider matters immensely.

To build on the topic of claim payouts: you generally know which insurers are known for being "difficult" when it comes to paying out, though there are always exceptions. With Allianz, for instance, I've never known anyone to have issues, yet recently they refused to pay a claim for a friend under his comprehensive coverage. They claimed the damage couldn't have happened the way he described (he said someone hit him in a parking lot, but they insisted it could only happen while driving). If I hadn't pulled some strings, that man would have been left without $1.75 because he doesn't understand these technicalities and certainly wouldn't have fought the claim in court.

Did they try to sell you on the idea that passengers aren't covered unless you opt for that extra rider?
I honestly can't believe that little trick is still being used today... that add-on shouldn't have anything to do with the actual legal right to compensation that a passenger is entitled to regardless of the extra coverage.

EDIT: Regarding what you mentioned, we all know who typically makes things difficult, and it’s certainly not the USA, Allianz, or most of the major international insurers... hmmm... so who is actually left for us to turn to? Of course, a few bad apples can happen anywhere, but that's just how it goes sometimes.

Yeah, and? What exactly did the USA do wrong here?

It’s not like the police were involved; reconstruction to check for potential fraud is standard practice for pretty much any insurance company out there. I mean, do you honestly think anyone is just going to sign off on a $30,000 vehicle claim just because you asked nicely?
And then there's this whole thing about rental cars and public transit—honestly, stop acting so entitled, what does any of that have to do with them?
The two-month window is the legal deadline, so they aren't actually breaking any rules there.
Wait, did you seriously tell them you wouldn't pay your premiums? LOL, how exactly would you go about renewing your registration then?
Regarding that EU report, if the guy refused to plead guilty, he'd be in massive trouble. But that mess wouldn't be caused by the USA or some insurance provider; it would be his own fault. Without a police report, and with both sides telling different stories, how are they supposed to pay out?

Basically, you're just venting wildly without having a clue about the actual struggles people face when they have to fight through the court system for years over serious injuries.

PS This isn't really about the USA; it's about clearing up the huge misconception that it doesn't matter which company you choose for your mandatory coverage.

Look, I personally find it pretty hard to believe that the United States would hold up on payments without a good reason (you didn't really specify why they're stalling or what that actually entails), but if you haven't experienced firsthand how some people drag others through the legal system for years, you might be comparing apples to oranges. Of course, there are always exceptions to the rule.

Hannah Allen5 said:What kind of headaches can you actually run into with your insurance? I mean, you could end up having issues with whoever you happen to hit 😬

As for that whole duplication thing, I guess you should probably look into it, since most companies offer it in one way or another just to make sure you don't go hunting for some other quote that's maybe a couple hundred bucks cheaper down the line 🙂

Jesse Doyle3 said:As the previous poster pointed out, you won't personally run into any issues—the only ones who might suffer are the people you eventually cause damage to.

That said, when it comes to collision coverage, you really need to be careful about which insurer you pick. You shouldn't let a low premium blind you to the quality of the provider.

It’s just not right... unfortunately, everyone seems focused on whether they'll be billed for some minor detail, without ever considering that if you hide an accident where a loved one was riding with you, someone dear to you could end up being held liable by that policy.
Of course, I can already hear everyone saying, "Oh, I'm such a pro driver, I'll definitely never be at fault," but honestly, that mindset says a lot about a person's judgment.

So, when you're signing up for mandatory coverage, please think about whether you'd really risk having your kid, spouse, sibling, or best friend stuck in legal battles over a claim just because you opted for $67a cheaper policy
instead of checking which company is actually reliable and going with them.
It's funny how it works—if you were buying a new AC unit, nobody would even hesitate to pay a few extra bucks for a reputable brand rather than a cheap knockoff, yet when it comes to this, people act so differently.

I'm not talking about any specific person's question here; I'm just speaking generally.

As long as you don't have a history of being aggressive, I really think you can stay totally relaxed through both criminal and civil proceedings.
It’s especially true if your kid just snuck up behind you while you were distracted by the morning news, causing you to flinch and accidentally bump into them—you can always just tell them you got spooked by a stray dog passing by.
Plus, there’s a level of responsibility on the other parent to keep an eye on where the little one is wandering off to.

It would be incredibly difficult for anyone to actually prove you're some kind of aggressor who goes around hitting toddlers just because they're being fussy.

I actually had a similar mishap a long time ago, though thankfully nothing came of it; a toddler about two or three years old was running through a crowd near me, and when I turned around for no particular reason, I ended up slamming my head right into his knee, which honestly could have broken my nose.

Just one more thing... if the HDMI cable is successfully sending audio over to the TV, then there's really no way the issue lies with the motherboard or the integrated sound card, right?

So, I've run into a bit of a snag with my speakers—when I try to power them on, the indicator light just stays dark.
It’s a little strange because if I crank the volume all the way up, I can actually hear some sound coming through, though it's incredibly faint. I've already checked my Control settings and everything is set to maximum.

Does anyone have any thoughts on whether this might be a software glitch, or am I just looking at a pair of junk speakers? I'm also wondering if there could be a hardware issue tied back to the motherboard.

I'm using the Logitech Z323.

Andrew Wells2 said:Quick little question here!😁

Do young drivers end up paying more for insurance than someone over 24 if the policy is in their name?

It usually depends on whether you're looking at comprehensive coverage or just the basic liability, but for standard liability, it shouldn't make a difference.

granitecrane13 said:Does anyone have a solid recommendation for the best card to use for online shopping? I was leaning toward grabbing one of those Chase Visa cards designed for young adults. I’m 21 and currently navigating life as a college student. Honestly, these prepaid cards seem pretty slick because they give you total control over your spending—I’d just load up a specific amount and then use that for my online purchases. Does that actually work the way I think it does, or is there some hidden catch I'm missing? I’m a bit of a novice when it comes to this stuff. What would you all suggest?

I've used one of these on eBay before and it worked perfectly fine for me.

Ryan Carter52 said:I guess accident coverage isn't officially part of the AO package, so they could probably toss that in for free if they really wanted to.
And since he's suggesting everyone else should follow suit, I suppose there's no reason why they shouldn't, right?

State Farm actually offers something pretty similar for $15.
You basically get roadside assistance and passenger accident protection in a 30,000 to 60,000 ratio.

Could someone help me make sense of this? I'm honestly just curious about what kind of pitch they use when they're out there selling this stuff.

Ryan Carter52 said:Even if they do have it, I guess that doesn't really solve everything.
A guy I know had his relative shot at, and even though the shooter was clearly at fault, when my relative went to see the authorities and OpenAI, they basically just told him the whole thing would drag on for three years until it hits a statute of limitations, and then they'd probably just tell him to fix his own car and goodbye.
The FBI determined the guy caused the accident, and both parties were insured through State Farm.
So, yeah, that's just how things go with supposedly all-powerful companies like State Farm and those other massive insurance giants.🙂

So, did the claim end up expiring?

Honestly, you'd have to be a total idiot to let a standard damage claim expire like that.

Charles Ramos7 said:And what’s the guarantee that if I pay for premium insurance, the guy shooting at me will actually have coverage too? 🙂

It’s really just about the principle of the thing—the more people who decide to steer clear of "them," the better your chances are of actually walking away with some decent cash. I remember once when I went down to the local Chase branch to settle an account, and seeing that difference in the final numbers really puts things into perspective. $67 I was just thinking about that earlier today while I was grabbing my coffee, and honestly, it feels like we might be getting ahead of ourselves a bit.

mellowgull80 said:Of course there isn't any guarantee. To expect one in a market this volatile is fundamentally naive. It’s like walking into a high-stakes poker game at a Vegas casino expecting to walk away with the house's chips just because you played a solid hand; the house always holds the edge, and uncertainty is baked into the very foundation of the game. Expecting certainty in these matters is a fundamental misunderstanding of how risk operates.

Every single party involved must pay out damages. There is no way around it. When it comes to oversight, Halliburton stands above all insurance providers. 🙂

In my view, the identity of the attorney you retain carries far more weight than the specific party you are litigating against. It isn't just about the conflict itself; it is about the caliber of the counsel navigating it. To use an analogy, if you are facing a massive storm, it matters significantly less whether you are fighting the wind or the rain, and much more whether the captain steering your ship actually knows how to navigate a gale. Selecting a subpar legal representative is a fundamental strategic error that can undermine even the most righteous cause. 😍

That’s not quite right, actually.
The courts really hold all the power when it comes to insurance disputes, so while a corporation like Halliburton might have some influence over how things are handled, they can't exactly dictate the exact dollar amount someone should be paid.

Choosing the right lawyer might not seem like a huge deal at first glance, but I've found that picking someone who tries to play hardball when they don't have to can sometimes backfire on you.
If someone isn't in a massive rush to get their hands on the cash and doesn't mind playing the waiting game, they might actually find that following the standard corporate way of doing things pays off in the long run—especially since interest keeps building up—but honestly, you don't run into many people with that kind of patience these days.

George Lewis9 said:Look, if someone shoots me, I don't care whether they work for the CIA or Herac's, if you catch my drift 😁

Saved me some money $67

But would you really feel the same way if one of their people started shooting at you or someone close to you?

Robert Vaughn10 said:2011 was a year where gold saw massive rallies followed by brutal crashes...
It was an absolute disaster for long-term investors if they bought at the peak. Looking at how dull the drill has been here in 2013, there really shouldn't be years with swings of several hundred dollars. But hey, who knows.
It’s already obvious that things are getting significantly more complicated in the market.
I still maintain that for anyone without gold, buying and holding it as insurance is the smart move. I could easily pick up 8 or 10 ounces tomorrow to solidify my position while staying liquid, but I won't do anything out of pure panic. I'll wait for the market to start "drawing pistols" and send prices through the roof. I've already paid a premium for everything, even though there were times when I was bone dry. Being broke actually forced me to sell 3 ounces in early 2012 due to some other unexpected events. My Goldman Sachs moment.
So, let the market decide how much further it wants to squeeze everything downward. Personally, it would actually be quite uncomfortable if prices spiked right now. That's when I'd jump back in to patch the obvious hole in my own balance sheet. I can smell trouble coming—mostly due to paper trading, but an extra hit to gold isn't out of the question. Maybe I'll grab some silver; that wouldn't hurt either, perhaps even more for the long term. Right now, I'm sitting on 370 ounces, which feels a bit light.
Just to comment on the ratio of the NYSE to gold: it's currently over 8, which is quite something.
The NYSE itself is at 14,000, which is high—bordering on ridiculously unrealistic, especially considering the dollar still has decent purchasing power, but whatever.☕

"Another telegram was sent into the ether, and then all went silent. The coffin lid closed over the sixth army (and a fascist one at that)..."

😲

I was just skimming through your posts, and while you were talking about gold, that number "370 ounces" jumped right out at me. I did a quick bit of math in my head and realized that's worth something like $750,000... and I thought, man, this guy is sitting on a massive nest egg.

It wasn't until I read it a third time that I realized you were actually talking about silver, though even then, it's still a pretty impressive stash, just obviously a smaller total value.

rustywalker82 said:The Indians won't let it drop below 1650.



The guy is basically half man, half Federal Reserve (and he's got ISO written right there in the corner). 🙂

🤣🤣

I was just reading this earlier today, and it looks like Timothy Geithner warned leaders in Washington, D.C. that the US national debt is set to hit that $16.4 trillion ceiling by New Year's Eve 2012, which is basically the legal limit allowed by our laws. He mentioned he’s going to try his best to prevent a total standstill where the government can't borrow or pay its bills by using some “extraordinary accounting measures.”

I've been thinking about this while sipping my morning coffee, and I'm curious what you all think—is this actually a good sign or should we be worried? 😁

Getting 70 tons each isn't a bad haul at all... I might just have to go out and treat myself to a new boat with that kind of windfall 😁