Pointless to Buy Umbrella Policy After Accident?

[illy]

I was in a car accident and have $100k in liability coverage per person. There was no damage to either vehicle, but the other driver said he was in pain and was taken away in an ambulance.

I contacted my insurance agent right after, and he said why don't we hold off on putting in a claim since there's no damage to either car. If you get sued, you have so and so coverage, then we'll open the investigation, etc.

If I buy an umbrella liability policy now, will it cover any lawsuits stemming from that accident? I have not been sued, just had the accident. Would I still be covered if I get sued right after buying the umbrella policy, or the umbrella policy would have to have been in effect since before the accident? In other words- does the coverage typically go by the lawsuit or the thing that precipitated the lawsuit?

Again, no damage to either car, and it says that in the police report. Just the other driver saying he's in pain and me getting a ticket.

 

[Guest]

I was in a car accident and have $100k in liability coverage per person. There was no damage to either vehicle, but the other driver said he was in pain and was taken away in an ambulance.

I contacted my insurance agent right after, and he said why don't we hold off on putting in a claim since there's no damage to either car. If you get sued, you have so and so coverage, then we'll open the investigation, etc.

If I buy an umbrella liability policy now, will it cover any lawsuits stemming from that accident? I have not been sued, just had the accident. Would I still be covered if I get sued right after buying the umbrella policy, or the umbrella policy would have to have been in effect since before the accident? In other words- does the coverage typically go by the lawsuit or the thing that precipitated the lawsuit?

Again, no damage to either car, and it says that in the police report. Just the other driver saying he's in pain and me getting a ticket.

I have a PUL policy, and here is what the Occurence clause line 5 says:

Occurence(s) means an accident including continuous or repeated exposure to the same general conditions. It must result in bodily injury, property damage, or personal injury caused by an insured. The occurence resulting in bodily injury or property damage must be during the policy period. The occurence resulting in the personal injury must be due to an offense committed during the policy period.

YOU are the insured here. Since your policy period would start after the wreck, unless your agent is suggesting it be backdated to, say, the day before, I would say a PUL would be useless here. Remember, insurance is for FUTURE risk, not something that has already occurred. I don't know what your agent was suggesting here, but if you try this I would think the insurance company would consider both you and your agent guilty of fraud.

Also, you may not be able to get an umbrella policy for a while after this either, but since the events are just unfolding, I may be speaking too soon.

 

[xrac]

An umbrella policy will only be good for a future liability. "It is too late to close the barn door after the horse has already gotten out."

 

[Guest]

An umbrella policy will only be good for a future liability. "It is too late to close the barn door after the horse has already gotten out."

Your response was more to the point than mine. I just wonder about the agent here....put off the claim????

 

[djs]

Actually, I agree with the agent. There is no need to file a claim until the other person does. The insured has nothing to file a claim on yet (no damage).

Odds are, the other person was checked at the hospital and released. Perhaps a few visits to a chiropractor. It happens, but without damage to the cars, it's a very minor accident and no real settlement will occur for any extended health problem.

The accident is still reported since there is a police report. No need to file the claim till a claim is needed.

Dan

 

[Guest]

Actually, I agree with the agent. There is no need to file a claim until the other person does. The insured has nothing to file a claim on yet (no damage).

Odds are, the other person was checked at the hospital and released. Perhaps a few visits to a chiropractor. It happens, but without damage to the cars, it's a very minor accident and no real settlement will occur for any extended health problem.

The accident is still reported since there is a police report. No need to file the claim till a claim is needed.

Dan

I stand corrected.

 

[illy]

Thanks for the info.

I didn't speak to the agent about the umbrella policy, just to report the accident. The umbrella policy I just thought of yesterday.

 

[xrac]

Thanks for the info.

I didn't speak to the agent about the umbrella policy, just to report the accident. The umbrella policy I just thought of yesterday.

Umbrella policies are realatively cheap and an excellent way to increase coverage.

 

[Insurance-Guy]

Actually, I agree with the agent. There is no need to file a claim until the other person does. The insured has nothing to file a claim on yet (no damage).

Odds are, the other person was checked at the hospital and released. Perhaps a few visits to a chiropractor. It happens, but without damage to the cars, it's a very minor accident and no real settlement will occur for any extended health problem.

The accident is still reported since there is a police report. No need to file the claim till a claim is needed.

Dan

Dan I have to disagree with this…anytime that one of my insured's is involved in an accident if there is another party involved and ABSOLUTLEY IF a person went to the hospital has a injury I Advise them to report the claim to the carrier...or we set up a claim right then for them. The last thing I would do is tell someone well there is no claim when someone left in an ambulance complaining of back pain even if there is no damage to the car.

I actually recall reading an article regarding an agents E and O paying out due to the fact that the insured called in to their agents office and advised their agent of a claim and the agent told them that there was no need to file a claim since there was no damage to their car or the other car. I do not remember how long but months later the other party got an attorney involved after the person starting (watching TV and seeing all of the commercials) I mean having back pain. The insurance carrier that the insured was with denied coverage since they said that they had not been notified of the loss in a timely manner…AND the agents E and O paid the claim... Do I think this happens a lot absolutely not but you better dot your i's and cross your t’s too.

I am not saying that I don't ever have off the record conversations with my clients regarding their options and filing the claim...however I always advise them and document that I DID advise them to report the loss.

Now as far as the umbrella policy I think it is pointless to purchase it now…the claim has occurred already. For the future I would get one what if it was a bad claim how far is that 100k going to go? I recommend umbrella policies a LOT and if someone is even thinking about having one than they should have one. They are very inexpensive and many times will lower your auto rate too.

 

[BTFuzz]

I'm reading through all of this and I just can't get passed the question asked by the op about purchasing an umbrella now to cover something that happened in the past.

He!!, why buy insurance at all? Might as well wait until the house burns down before buying the coverage! Unbelievable...