Present-day motorists enjoy the opportunity to add uninsured motorists’ coverage to their automobile policy. If a driver with such coverage gets hit by an uninsured driver, then that victim/driver can make a claim against his or her own insurance company. Drivers did not always have that option. Insurance companies began to introduce that option at some point during the 1960s.
Provisions made about uninsured or underinsured coverage.
The extent of that added coverage cannot exceed the amount of the policy holder’s primary coverage. Insurers have a reason for adding that provision. The cost of the uninsured motorists’ coverage, and the underinsured drivers’ coverage is relatively small. In contrast to that, the cost of a policy’s premium tends to be much larger.
Due to that contrast in costs, consumers might feel tempted to buy the less-expensive coverage, and not get the more expensive, primary policy. Insurers did not want consumers to adopt that practice. That is why they chose to introduce that special provision.
In addition, the insurers made one request of any policy holder that was involved in a motor vehicle accident. Such policy holders were supposed to let their automobile insurance company know that the other driver was uninsured. A driver should become aware of that fact when the other driver was unable to supply information on the name of his or her insurance company, along with the policy number.
How does a claim get settled, if the other party does not have any type of automobile insurance?
The policy holder totals-up all the costs created by the accident, the medical bills, the cost of the car repairs and the loss of income from the employer. Using that figure, the policy holder determines what would be a fair compensation.
Meanwhile the injured driver’s insurance company studies the accident, and decides on what it feels to be a fair settlement offer. Personal Injury Lawyer in Ottawa knows that if the figure put forward by the policy holder and that one put forward by the insurance company are quite far apart, an alternative to negotiations must be arranged.
That alternative normally takes the form of binding arbitration. During binding arbitration, a neutral arbiter or a panel of arbiters hears each side’s argument. Then either the single arbiter or the panel reaches a decision, regarding the size of the compensation owed to the policy holder.
According to the law, the policy holder cannot sue his or her own insurance company. In other words, he or she must accept the decision made during the arbitration. That decision cannot be appealed.
That fact highlights the wisdom behind hiring an attorney. He or she can present a strong case, in hopes of winning a favorable decision from the insurance company or the arbiter.