🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4g65vm$brk@ixnews4.ix.netcom.com>,
gvhunter@ix.netcom.com(Galen Hunter ) wrote:

> In <msadamsDMupqu.374@netcom.com> msadams@netcom.com (Michael Adams)
> writes: 

> >If you are a good driver, you are really in trouble with no-fault. 
> Your 
> >rates can go nowhere but UP!  Those accidents that were not your
> fault, 
> >like somebody rear ending you, would be paid by YOUR insurance
> company.  
> >If your insurance company services a larger percentage of good drivers
> 
> >that the high risk companies, they are going to have to collect more 
> >money to pay for claims on not-at-fault accidents.  They are not going
> 
> >to be getting any money from the people causing the accidents.  This
> is  
> >just common sense.
> 
> This is a stong, well thought out point, and I'm wondering how the
> insurance industry would respond. My view, is I see "good drivers"
> having to pay for "not-at fault" accidents - all the time - now.  
> 
It is a good point *if* the high-risk drivers actually have insurance. Do
we know what proportion of accidents are caused by such drivers? I'm
undecided on this issue.

-- 
Don McKenzie, Hollywood, CA

Nothing is what it first seems to be.