You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer
supported by the Administrators.
Visit
The New DU.
Reply #69: No, the insurance premiums would be reduced, theoretically.
[View All]
TexasObserver
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-27-10 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #64 |
69. No, the insurance premiums would be reduced, theoretically. |
|
Edited on Thu May-27-10 05:58 PM by TexasObserver
The insurance company is the plaintiff against the dog owner. The recovery by the insurance company helps to keep insurance premiums down. We as insurance consumer benefit from the negligent dog owner being held responsible.
Who do you think is being greedy? The car owner? Their insurer? The dog owner?
The guilty party is the dog owner. The car owner covered their loss by use of insurance, and now the insurer is stepping into the shoes of the car owner and requiring the dog owner to reimburse the insurer. That's as it should be. No greed.
|
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.