Pat,
If an attorney is a professional obfuscator, and there are many who would
swear to that, then you have pinned me down. :-) On the other hand, to
recommend that an insured avoid depending on ambiguous policy language
would, I suggest, eschew obfuscation.
You, BTW, demonstrate one of my propositions. Your insurance is not with
what I termed, I believe, run-of-the-mill insurance companies. Lloyds does
not tend to be one of those who refuse to amend or discuss the boilerplate.
On the other hand, you can expect to pay a reasonable premium for the agreed
coverage. Part of the problem I see again and again is the other side of
this coin, that is, the insured who is reluctant to get into details out of
fear that the premium will increase. One must be prepared to pay a premium
commensurate with the insurance company's exposure to loss.
It is hard for a guy who has made his living by the sweat of his tongue for
30 years to change his ways, I guess.
Anyway, you are to be complimented for your approach to insuring your motor
car(s).
All the best,
Jim Brown
-------------
-----Original Message-----
From: PSR <psr@mnw.net>
To: Jim & Ann Brown <thebrowns@pdq.net>
Date: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 10:43 PM
Subject: Re: Collector Car Insurance Advice
>Jim,
>
>You state that you make your living by "saying this" but you seem to omit
>your profession. Please illuminate. It sounds as if you are a
professional
>obfuscator.
>
>You defy us to find a lawyer who can answer questions by reading the
policy.
>You promise us that no good insurance company will answer us in writing and
>only an agent/broker who is dumb enough will. Oh and by the way only
judges
>know the answer but you have to go to court.
>
>Masterful obfuscation in my written opinion. (:;:<)) (bald with double
>chin winking through trifocals for the emoticon challenged)
>
>Pat Ryan
>Insured by Parish and LLoyds and comfortably numb.
>
|