How to handle insurance claims

With the proposed indemnity of $6,500 for a death and $4 per day, plus medical and hospital expenses, for those injured as a basis, let us see how the Marx plan would work out in actual practice. View best rates here.

John Smith compresses three boon companies into his coupe for a Sunday joy ride. After refreshments at a road house John contests for the right of way with a limited train. Result: Four dead and a $26,000 claim against the state fund “jack-pot.”

Our old friend, John Doe, now a prominent bootlegger, is conveying a valuable cargo from Toledo to Cincinnati. Pursued by hi-jackers he misses a turn and ends his career in a ditch. Result: One dead and a $6,500 claim against the state fund “jack-pot”.

Then there is Richard Roe, another old friend. This time he happens to be the rollicking son of a rich and indulgent papa. Returning from a party with his lady friend and driving one of those sporty roadsters he makes a futile effort to climb a telegraph pole. Result: Richard killed, his lady friend badly hurt, and the state pays the rich and indulgent father $6,500 and the young lady $4.00 a day for some weeks.

William Brown driving fifty miles an hour jumps the track at a curve. Result: One dead and a claim against the state “jack-pot” for $6,500.

Samuel Green is a pedestrian. He steps from between-cars parked in the middle of a block on a boulevard and without looking either way attempts to cross.


Car insurance policies – types of coverages explained

A car operated by a careful and moderate driver hits him. Result: One dead and another $6,500 claim.

I could continue such illustrations almost indefinitely. All of you can add to them from your own personal knowledge. What I am trying to impress on you by their use is the fact that under the Marx plan every motor car owner in Ohio will be compelled by the State to indemnity victims of such accidents. What equity can there be in such an arrangement? Is there any legal, moral or social justification for such an enforced contributionship? If there indeed be sound arguments in the affirmative I would like to hear them. Click here to view best quotes in your area.

Let us next look at the other side of the picture.

Andrew Black, carpenter, takes a day off to fix a leak in the roof of his modest home. He slips, falls to the ground and is killed. Is a state fund jack-pot contemplated to pay the heirs $6,500 in this worthy case? It is not.
Mrs. Henry Jones is a widow with two children to support. She takes in washing. While at work she is badly scalded and is compelled to spend many weeks in the hospital charity ward. Is a state-fund jack-pot contemplated to provide indemnity in this likewise worthy case? It is not.


Drivers and pedestrians – insurance claims

Judge Marx does not advocate that the automobile owner be a collectible defendant, but demands that payment be made for every case of injury or death. Under this proposal the state would create a great organization similar to that administering workmen’s compensation, would tax every vehicle owner, and from the funds secured would pay every claimant without regard to the circumstances under which injury occurred. Visit this website to get free auto insurance quotes.

At the time of the instant address, criticism has driven the scheme’s proponents to the point where they deny any intention to establish a governmental insurance monopoly. But there can be little doubt as to what is really sought when Judge Marx’s address so bristles with reference to the benevolent Industrial Commission.

Before, detailing objections to Compulsory Compensation let us point out the fallacy in urging that the automobile victim occupies a status similar to the injured workman’s, and should share in a fund similar to that available under workmen’s compensation. Historically our institutions always have recognized the peculiar intimacy of the relations between master and servant, and our workmen’s compensation laws are an outgrowth of this relationship.

What contract exists between the automobile driver and, say, a pedestrian? What control has the former over the physical situs of an accident? What compensation is received by one and paid by the other? What profit is realized by the operator because of the pedestrian’s presence? What property of his does the driver direct the other to use in order that a profit be realized? Does operation of a motor vehicle produce a marketable product in whose cost a casualty expense is absorbed by the buying public? Any analogy between the two situations obviously fails.


Auto insurance basics – Insurance 101

Fools will rush upon railroad crossings where angels later tread. The smart grocery clerk tears up and down my quiet street and goes around corners on two wheels. I want him regulated. A drunken driver leaves dead and injured in his wake. He never should drive again. An exuberant student plays he is on his own campus in the streets of my city. Car insurance quotes comparison made easy – click here.

One-armed men and deaf men and men whose sight is affected have a right to drive an automobile in many places. People who ought to be in a sanitarium are put in automobiles instead.

Why? Because in too many places in the past, state legislatures haven’t had the nerve to enact a modern motor code, or haven’t had the requisite knowledge to write a law with teeth in it. For fear of offending constituents they dare not enact a strict driver’s license law and eliminate, through examination or forfeiture of license, the person who should not drive a car.

Instead they offer a solace of money as a recompense for death. What a double tragedy!

There is an appreciable public sentiment for some plan whereby victims of automobile traffic will find financially responsible those causing damage. The usual suggestion has been that carriage of liability insurance be made compulsory.


Whats is accident insurance

Finally, the article pads its tale of woe by descanting on the numbers of victims of automobile accidents caused by dangerous curves and other defects of the highways. What has this got to do with the subject of the article? Find more information on auto insurance basics on our website.

Compulsory insurance is no way to mend highways. Compulsory liability insurance would not benefit the victims of such accidents. Nor would compulsory compensation insurance necessarily do so, since its latest proponents, recognizing the iniquity of the original idea of compelling careful motorists to insure “joy-riders” against jumping the road, butting into fences, lamp-posts and the like, would now limit the compensation coverage to collisions between motor-vehicles and collisions between a motor vehicle and a pedestrian.
Continue reading “Whats is accident insurance” »


Find answers to all your insurance questions here.

Hi, welcome to our Q and A section. Find answers to all your insurance questions here. Enjoy!