Another interesting detail in this little story. My son called another insurance company agent to try and get a better deal. This one gave him the same story and also said a good part of the problem was his credit score, he STILL would pay out the you-know-what for car insurance due to that. I know, WTF does one's credit score have to do with the ability to drive a car safely one might reasonably ask? The insurance industry, in all it's wisdom, apparently deems that a poor credit score indicates a "irresponsible and careless character" that could possibly translate into careless driving and thus should pay higher rates. The fact that my son has had no accidents or moving violations apparently means less than one's credit score. And yes of course, my son offered to pay a year in advance if they were worried about getting paid. he was told that would make no difference, EVERYONE pays in advance or they get no insurance.
Like i always say IT"S ALWAYS ABOUT THE MONEY. On Jul 26, 6:07 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > Perp, > > My most sincere condolances over your loss. I understand completely. I > feel the same way about the 1998 Lincoln Mark VIII LSC I'm driving, > 300 hp performance with the comfort of a Lincoln. LOVE that car. > A friend of mine had a Supra, wonderful car, great performance. > Politically we have our differences, but we appreciate good cars at > least. > > On Jul 26, 1:43 pm, Perplexed <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > My sentiments exactly. I loved that car and actually cried when I had > > to trade it in for a more appropriate "family" vehicle when it became > > too difficult to fit two car seats with growing kids in the Supra. > > LOL. I wish I'd have kept it about now. > > > On Jul 26, 2:24 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > perp, > > > > I', sorry but how could one NOT get speeding tickets driving one of > > > those? What a sweet car! > > > > On Jul 26, 10:43 am, Perplexed <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I thought the same thing. LOL. > > > > > Back in the 80s I drove a Toyota Supra turbo and managed to get one > > > > too many speeding tickets on my license. I had to pay high risk > > > > insurance rates for 3 years and even back THEN it amounted to more > > > > than $250 per month just to pull the car out of the driveway. No > > > > accidents....only speeding tickets. I thought that was bs then and > > > > still do. It went up even more when towards the end of that period I > > > > slid on the ice and hit a car stopped at a green light; imagine how > > > > happy I was to pay even more b/c of some stoned-out moron sitting at a > > > > green light! > > > > > On Jul 26, 11:33 am, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > The irony of this thread, is that Holly supports the politicians who > > > > > advocate these kinds of laws, (e.g.; the Democrat Party!!) yet > > > > > bitches about > > > > > it when it effects his own brood. > > > > > > Irony? Or Ignorance? > > > > > > You be the judge!!! > > > > > > On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Keith In Tampa > > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > You are exactly correct Perp, at least here in Florida. The SR-22, > > > > > > as well > > > > > > as the insurance penalty, is required only if you don't turn in > > > > > > your tags > > > > > > after being uninsured. This had to have been the case with Holly's > > > > > > son, and > > > > > > I wasn't going to berate the point. > > > > > > > I actually agree with Holly on this issue, the law, even though well > > > > > > intentioned, is a bad law, and benefits the insurance companies, > > > > > > thereby > > > > > > hurting those individuals of lower socio-economic status. > > > > > > > Kind of like the bankruptcy laws now.....I think it is a bit over > > > > > > $1000.00 > > > > > > in filing fees now in federal court to file for protection..... > > > > > > > The family law cases that I see frequently, have those who are > > > > > > dealing with > > > > > > Florida's Department of Children, literally jumping through hoops, > > > > > > that no > > > > > > middle class individual could accomplish, much less an individual > > > > > > without a > > > > > > vehicle. By example, some of these individuals are required to > > > > > > take a bus, > > > > > > (of course the State furnishes them bus passes) across town, that > > > > > > would > > > > > > entail a day's travel, to attend some class at night that is thirty > > > > > > miles > > > > > > from their home. I posed this question to a Court not too long > > > > > > ago, that > > > > > > of all the individuals sitting in the courtroom, all with > > > > > > juris-doctorates, > > > > > > none of the individuals could accomplish the case plan that had > > > > > > been laid > > > > > > out by the Department of Children and Families for a black woman > > > > > > with no > > > > > > vehicle and who worked approximately 30 hours a week in a fast food > > > > > > restaurant with three kids to support. > > > > > > > Like I said last night, there are countless examples of bad laws > > > > > > that prey > > > > > > upon the poor and downtrodden. These insurance laws are but one > > > > > > example. > > > > > > > On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Perplexed > > > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > >> What difference does that make? > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > >> Umm...a huge one. Read your state's law. Only drivers and those > > > > > >> who > > > > > >> own cars are required to have insurance. If someone doesn't own a > > > > > >> car > > > > > >> and doesn't have insurance, they can't be penalized for going > > > > > >> without > > > > > >> it for a time period. > > > > > > >>http://dor.mo.gov/mvdl/drivers/insurinfo.htm > > > > > > >> I would check into it. It doesn't appear that it's legal for them > > > > > >> to > > > > > >> punish him if he wasn't driving during that time period and didn't > > > > > >> own > > > > > >> a car. They can stiff him for 3 years with those SR22 rates on > > > > > >> this > > > > > >> if he doesn't fight it. > > > > > > >> On Jul 26, 9:45 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> > Perp, > > > > > > >> > What difference does that make? He is not being punished for not > > > > > >> > driving, he is being "punished" for not buying car insurance for > > > > > >> > 6 > > > > > >> > consequetive months. In fact he was NOT driving for most of > > > > > >> > those 6 > > > > > >> > months as he had been in a bad accident and was in a wheelchair > > > > > >> > for > > > > > >> > much of the time. > > > > > > >> > On Jul 25, 11:34 pm, Perplexed <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > >> > > How did his insurance company know he was driving for the > > > > > >> > > months he > > > > > >> > > was driving your car? Can he not just say "I wasn't driving"? > > > > > > >> > > On Jul 26, 12:15 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> > > > > > >> > > wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > Perp, > > > > > > >> > > > Nope, his driving record is perfectly clean. Only thing he > > > > > >> > > > did > > > > > >> "wrong" > > > > > >> > > > is to not have car insurance for 6 consecutive months as he > > > > > >> > > > was > > > > > >> > > > driving a car owned, registered and insured by me. I could > > > > > >> > > > be wrong > > > > > >> > > > about him actually having to file an SR-22 but the RATES he > > > > > >> > > > will > > > > > >> have > > > > > >> > > > to pay are the same as a driver that has had to. That was my > > > > > >> > > > point, > > > > > >> > > > having to pay the same rates as one who did have a bad > > > > > >> > > > driving > > > > > >> record. > > > > > > >> > > > On Jul 25, 10:46 pm, Perplexed <[email protected]> > > > > > >> > > > wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > That's weird. Here you have to do something wrong to have > > > > > >> > > > > to file > > > > > >> an > > > > > >> > > > > SR22 (like a DUI or uninsured accident). I'd check with > > > > > >> > > > > your BMV. > > > > > > >> > > > > On Jul 24, 2:41 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > > Little incident happened today that makes me furious and > > > > > >> > > > > > I'll be > > > > > >> > > > > > damned if I can think of any excuse/justification other > > > > > >> > > > > > than > > > > > >> plain old > > > > > >> > > > > > fashioned greed on the part of insurance companies. > > > > > >> > > > > > My oldest son is just now recovering from an extended > > > > > >> > > > > > period of > > > > > >> > > > > > unemployment bad enough that he had to return a new Jag > > > > > >> > > > > > that he > > > > > >> could > > > > > >> > > > > > no longer afford. I loaned him an old 4-wheel drive I > > > > > >> > > > > > kept for > > > > > >> fishing > > > > > >> > > > > > trips. I, of course ,had it licensed and insured in my > > > > > >> > > > > > own name. > > > > > >> > > > > > He recently started a decent job and was going to buy a > > > > > >> > > > > > used > > > > > >> Malibu I > > > > > >> > > > > > loaned him the money to buy. He called the insurance > > > > > >> > > > > > agent he'd > > > > > >> had > > > > > >> > > > > > for years to check on the insurance rate for it and was > > > > > >> > > > > > told he > > > > > >> would > > > > > >> > > > > > have to file what is called an SR-22 and would have to > > > > > >> > > > > > pay high > > > > > >> risk > > > > > >> > > > > > rates, the same as if he'd had multiple chargeable > > > > > >> > > > > > accidents, > > > > > >> moving > > > > > >> > > > > > violations and/or even a DUI! Why, he quite reasonably > > > > > >> > > > > > asked. He > > > > > >> was > > > > > >> > > > > > told it was because he had not had auto insurance for > > > > > >> > > > > > more than > > > > > >> 6 > > > > > >> > > > > > consecutive months. That's it! > > > > > >> > > > > > He had been driving with the same driver's license, had > > > > > >> > > > > > received > > > > > >> no > > > > > >> > > > > > tickets, no accidents, no nothing. So far as his actions > > > > > >> > > > > > as a > > > > > >> safe > > > > > >> > > > > > driver were concerned nothing whatsoever had changed. > > > > > >> > > > > > Why would > > > > > >> > > > > > someone who did not own a car have auto insurance? > > > > > >> > > > > > Conveniently, for the insurance companies, it is state > > > > > >> > > > > > law in > > > > > >> Missouri > > > > > >> > > > > > than one MUST have auto insurance. You can't even get > > > > > >> > > > > > your car > > > > > >> > > > > > licensed w/o showing proof of insurance and getting > > > > > >> > > > > > caught > > > > > >> driving w/o > > > > > >> > > > > > adequate insurance is a minimum of a $500.00 fine and > > > > > >> > > > > > the threat > > > > > >> of > > > > > >> > > > > > having your driver's license suspended. > > > > > > >> > > > > > Looks to me like a simple case of the insurance industry > > > > > >> > > > > > saying > > > > > >> "well, > > > > > >> > > > > > we are fucking you just because we can and there's not a > > > > > >> > > > > > damned > > > > > >> thing > > > > > >> > > > > > you can do about it". How many people in today's economy > > > > > >> > > > > > are > > > > > >> getting > > > > > >> > > > > > royally screwed like this I have to wonder?- Hide quoted > > > > > >> > > > > > text - > > > > > > >> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > >> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
