Uninsured and Underinsured Motorist Protection, often called UM and UIM, is a hotly debated topic in the insurance world. However, from the perspective of plaintiffs and plaintiffs' attorneys there is no debate. UM coverage is essential to purchase when one seeks automobile insurance. There are additional costs which often deter consumers from purchasing this valued protection, and insurance agents often deter consumers from purchasing the coverage or neglect it all together, but UM coverage is necessary for one to maintain "full" coverage. We, at the Law Firm of Sparkman & Sparkman, P.A., often talk to our clients and potential clients about the insurance coverage that they have and the decisions that were behind the purchase of auto insurance. Many people tell us that they have "full coverage" when they speak so highly of what their agent sold them. However, when we ask them if they have UM coverage, they are often unsure if they have ever even heard of it.
This is not the fault of the consumer. The insurance companies' primary goal is to make money. They may often make us feel that they are in the business of protection and security, but they are mainly in the business of making money - and large amounts of money at that. In the pursuit of this goal, the "marketing strategy" of the insurance companies has not included a push to sell more UM coverage. We must ask ourselves the question - why not? After all, they do make money on the premiums if they sell UM coverage, so why not do a better job of informing the consumer? The reason for not informing the consumer about UM protection is probably because the UM coverage is not a money maker for the insurance companies.
There are several reasons why the insurance companies shy away from promoting UM protection for their consumers. The first reason is obvious - if an individual is unfortunately injured, the insurance company has to pay for the injuries caused by a third party - the uninsured motorist. It is very easy for an insurance company to collect premiums on a minimum protection policy, and then pay only for vehicle damage in the event of an accident. Additionally, if the consumer is the person who injures a third party, the insurance company only has to pay the limits of the policy. However, the main reason that the majority of consumers are completely unaware of, is the effect UM coverage has on the litigation of a personal injury case. Let's use three case examples: (1) The first case is a person who has UM coverage and the person who causes their injuries is uninsured or underinsured. The case is not resolved prior to litigation and the injured person must file a lawsuit to seek reimbursement for the pain and suffering they have endured. When the case is filed and when the case goes to trial, it is John Doe v. Insurance Company X. The insurance company must defend itself, and more importantly, when the case goes before a jury (of other consumers) they see that the insurance company is involved. The downside of this situation is that the insurance company is the injured person's very own insurance company. Consumers often feel some sort of loyalty towards their insurance companies, whether right or wrong, and often have a problem filing suit against their company. The counter argument is very simple - that is what you pay your insurance company all those premiums for. The stigma attached to suing one's own insurance company is ill conceived and often promoted by the insurance companies themselves. (2) The second case is a person who DOES NOT have UM protection and the person who causes their injuries has some sort of bodily injury (BI) coverage. The case does not resolve prior to litigation and a lawsuit is filed. The case becomes John Doe v. Jane Doe. The case goes to trial and Jane Doe is the Defendant and she is sitting with her lawyers and she is at trial to defend her case. Here comes the problem - the jury sitting on the case NEVER hears the insurance company's name mentioned through the entirety of the trial. One may say, "why would you," because the insurance company is not involved. Well, the lawyers that Jane Doe has next to her ready to protect her are paid for by none other than the insurance company. The insurance company drives the entire defense, however the Jury never hears who is pulling the strings outside the courtroom. Even better - the jury is not even allowed to hear THE WORD INSURANCE throughout the entire trial. Yes, it is the law. The law was written by legislators who have been lobbied by very wealthy insurance companies, not by the consumers. (3) The third case is a person who DOES NOT have UM coverage and the person who causes the injuries has NO INSURANCE. This is the most heartbreaking situation that we face in the field of personal injury. In this situation, the injured person has no other remedy other than to personally sue the person who caused them injury, hich does not often provide favorable results. This third situation is the MOST IMPORTANT reason that all consumers should purchase UM coverage. It is the only method to insure that the consumer can protect themselves and the only way the consumer truly has "full coverage."
-Kevin Sparkman
