The options available to a policyholder could be added to his/her own auto insurance policy: 1) Uninsured motorist coverage, or 2) Underinsured motorist coverage
Option 1: This would provide the policyholder with coverage for a full range of accident-linked losses.
Some states require all holders of an auto insurance policy to invest in an uninsured motorist option.
That option’s coverage ensures reimbursement for the following losses:
—Lost income
—Bodily injury
—Pain and suffering
The same option covers both the driver and the vehicle’s occupants.
Injury Lawyers in Ottawa knows that it also covers members of the policyholder’s household, if any one of them should get hit by a car while walking or while riding a bicycle.
Could option 1 be used in any case where the policyholder’s vehicle was the target of a hit-and-run driver? That would not be possible in every state. In some states the driver that has purchased the uninsured motorist option can only use it in situations where the identity of the uninsured motorist has been established.
Option 2: That option would be used when the liability insurance of the responsible driver had failed to cover either the other party’s medical bills, or the pain and suffering.
Could someone that had purchased such an option make a claim against his/her own car insurance company? Yes, but the policyholder would have to realize that the insurance company could only cover the policyholder’s losses up to the policy’s limit, which should be stated in the policy’s terms.
Does a policyholder that has thought about buying the underinsured motorist option have to deal with any other restrictions? Yes, the policy limits on an underinsured option cannot be greater than the limits on the policyholder’s comprehensive policy.
Insurance companies added that restriction, after consumers discovered that the price of the underinsured motorist option was less than the price of the traditional comprehensive policy. Some consumers tried to purchase the option, in order to use it as a substitute for the comprehensive coverage.
Would the holder of an uninsured option or an underinsured option ever need the services of a lawyer?
Any one of the option-holding policyholders could need a lawyer’s services, if questions were to arise, in connection to an accident that had involved an uninsured motorist or an underinsured motorist. The adjusters in any one of the policyholders’ own insurance companies might question the reports about the nature or extent of the claimed injuries.
If the occupant of an underinsured vehicle were to get insured during the course of a collision, he/she might seek help from a lawyer, in order to find someone that could be held at least partly responsible for his/her injury. The occupant’s lawyer might seek money from the holder of option number 2.
Recent Comments