Limited Tort on Car Insurance

Status
Not open for further replies.

Al

Joined
Jun 8, 2002
Messages
20,177
Location
Elizabethtown, Pa
It saves you a chunk of change on your premium. Currently I do this option.

Last week we came with a hair's breath of being squashed between a two trucds. There was a car in front of me. We came to a rolling stop and a truck 1000 feet in back never slowed down and at the last second swerved around us.

Its a miracle me and the wife are around. Even though we have a Forester, we would have been pancake.

At best one of might have survived to spend the rest of our live in a vegetative state...(yes we have a living will). As a result I decided to remove the limited tort option bc it would give our kids a hammer to settle up.

I don't believe in lawsuits except under exceptional reasons. Too bad I need to go this route.
 
Gald you cheated death. Do you have your things together, will / trust, TOD , POD, etc... in order if something happened to either of you ?
 
In PA the full tort option is the way to go. It protects you the most if the at fault driver is uninsured or underinsured. Be glad you're not in Philadelphia, where the premium would be more.
 
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Gald you cheated death. Do you have your things together, will / trust, TOD , POD, etc... in order if something happened to either of you ?

Thanks...yea POA, Living Will, Regular will. Son has copies of all. He is 41, Daughter 45.
 
Originally Posted By: NormanBuntz
In PA the full tort option is the way to go. It protects you the most if the at fault driver is uninsured or underinsured. Be glad you're not in Philadelphia, where the premium would be more.
Up this way at least a third of the drivers are not who they say they are, are not here legally, and are driving uninsured vehicles.
 
Last edited:
shocked.gif
 
Originally Posted By: madRiver
I love the I don't believe in lawsuits but.....


You should think before you hammer someone..I know that is enjoyable..I do it. . You can only collect even medical to the extent that the other person has medical with limited tort. Under full tort you can sue for your additional medical..as others have pointed out.
 
I am also thinking about going back to full tort, which I've had in the past mostly as a punishment method for those who insist on driving drunk/wasted, and then causing injury and death of innocents.
 
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
I am also thinking about going back to full tort, which I've had in the past mostly as a punishment method for those who insist on driving drunk/wasted, and then causing injury and death of innocents.

That is partly my motivation...We think alike
cheers3.gif
Settlements on lawsuits can not be discharged in bankruptcy court. The low life will have to deal with it for the rest of his life.

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
So the question becomes, what is the premium difference?


I'll let you know today.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
So the question becomes, what is the premium difference?

Two vehicles went from $342 to $432 for 6 months. 26 percent increase.
 
Glad to hear this was only a scare.

Probably a wise move going to full Tort. One never knows. Had this been more than a scare, you and/or the missus could have been hospitalized or worse and still at some point have to deal with potential lawsuits from the vehicle you were rammed into.

I have some experience with this. Years ago my wife as pushed into a car at a construction stand-still. Car #3 sped off leaving my wife and car#1. Car #1 eventually sued us for neck and back injury which took years and lots of anguish to resolve. Not even a mark on either vehicle.
 
Last edited:
This was the first time I had heard of this limited tort vs full tort option. I guess I have never lived in a state with this option on insurance. According to what I read the only difference is that with limited tort you give up your right to sue for pain and suffering?
 
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
This was the first time I had heard of this limited tort vs full tort option. I guess I have never lived in a state with this option on insurance. According to what I read the only difference is that with limited tort you give up your right to sue for pain and suffering?

The other thing you give up is ability to recover even medical expenses beyond what the other driver chooses to carry.
If he chooses not to carry enough you are screwed. With full tort you can sue to recover more medical. Even if he can't pay it the judgement against him can not be discharged in bankruptcy court.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top