My Sister Paid Progressive Insurance to Defend Her Killer in Court
mattfisher.tumblr.com
mattfisher.tumblr.com
Insurance companies scare me. To think they'd defend their client's killers in court after you've been paying them for years... it's appalling. This, in my opinion, is an order of magnitude worse than patent trolling.
EDIT: I know life, auto, and health insurance are all slightly different things... but come on, they really are all identical except they have different details. The methodology is the same! Pay a constant rate, get paid* a lump sum if something bad happens.
* Haha, as if you'll get paid.
Sounds like the guy wasn't at fault. So he shouldn't have been liable, and he shouldn't have paid, so the insurance company shouldn't have paid on his behalf.
MattFisher even states:
>Now, I don’t discount the possibility that Katie was at fault in the accident, but it never really looked that way. The only witness who gave a statement on the day said that Katie had the light, etc
If you want life insurance, buy life insurance. Don't expect car insurance to be life insurance because you died in an auto collision, which was apparently no ones, or at least no one's conclusively fault.
I'm sorry for the loss of the Sister in this story, but I don't think progressive is doing something massively evil here (And I'm unwaveringly pro-consumer in most cases).
Also, flagging this, doesn't seem apropos to HN.
The jury disagreed, he was found negligent by a civil court.
Being a civil court, this only means that he was "probably guilty". The crown prosecutors obviously thought he wasn't "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt", otherwise he would have had criminal charges laid.
What I don't understand is the underinsurance thing. Isn't it illegal to be underinsured while driving a vehicle? How can it even be possible to buy inadequate insurance? Driving a 2-ton piece of metal at very high speeds on anything other than a closed track is a very heavy responsibility that all too many take too lightly.