Self insured is always an option my friend.

Captain Winky said:

---

I don't know if I am just being more observant, but it seems like the number of PI lawyer billboards has exploded. It seems like every other billboard is now an advertisement for one of them.

---

True! the Texas hammer, has billboards all the way down here in Angleton and I saw them up near Dallas as well.

KentuckyAg2 said:

---

Self insured is always an option my friend.

---

Could be wrong but don't believe so with a mortgage.

Now maybe you can say having a mortgage is an option....but for most people in the US a mortgage was needed to purchase their homes....

You're correct, I'm being a little facetious. The notion that insurance companies are leaches just put me off. People forget that insurance companies are businesses too..revenue doesn't equal profit.

I think the truth probably lies in a profit grab all the way down. Sure there are plenty in each industry that are reputable (can even say the majority), but when the PI lawyer has a chance to squeeze money out of the system the insurance company has a chance to squeeze money out of the system, and the entity doing the repair work (whether it be on your car or your body) has a chance to squeeze money out of the system... Well you're going to get a really bloated system.

and roofing companies are in bed with insurance adjusters.

KentuckyAg2 said:

---

Self insured is always an option my friend.

---

No it's not. A state law requires you to have liability insurance on all automobiles, besides what auto loans require if it's financed. And all mortgage companies require insurance on all loans. So, your statement is true for home insurance (only) for those who own their home outright (only) with no mortgage, so very few people are included in your statement. However, I'm one of those, and I chose to self-insure my lake house. The previous owner had flood insurance on it as well even though it's many feet above the spillway of the dam. I was close to doing it with my primary home, but wanted at least liability there due to hosting lots of functions and managed to finally get a reasonable rate.

Win At Life said:

---

KentuckyAg2 said:

---

Self insured is always an option my friend.

---

No it's not. A state law requires you to have liability insurance on all automobiles, besides what auto loans require if it's financed. And all mortgage companies require insurance on all loans. So, your statement is true for home insurance (only) for those who own their home outright (only) with no mortgage, so very few people are included in your statement. However, I'm one of those, and I chose to self-insure my lake house. The previous owner had flood insurance on it as well even though it's many feet above the spillway of the dam. I was close to doing it with my primary home, but wanted at least liability there due to hosting lots of functions and managed to finally get a reasonable rate.

---

Tell that to the illegal aliens that didn't have auto insurance involved with my daughters wreck.

I've owned my primary residence outright for 15 years or so and own an investment property in Bryan outright.

So its not required for me, but i choose to carry homeowners insurance.

Its highly unlikely homeowners insurance is worth over the long haul, but I'm not willing to take that risk.


I only carry liability on my vehicles, but I don't own news cars and I'm not concerned about a wreck that's my fault. I would just eat the $ or pay for the repair.

That's hilarious. Those two entities are notorious for being at odds w each other

rlb28 said:

---

That's hilarious. Those two entities are notorious for being at odds w each other

---

not in my personal experience. There were many houses in my preplanned HOA community that were getting new roofs and getting the insurance company to pick up the tab for "hail" damage about five years ago.

I don't think we actually had hail in our neighborhood, maybe some areas surrounding the neighborhood.

Most of the roofs were about 18 -22 years old and people were replacing them in droves.

I was hesitant to try to get my 22 year old roof replaced in 2021 using insurance because I knew it was just an old roof.

Finally I said to myself, "if you can beat them join them"

Sure enough, I also had "hail" damage.

I paid the deductible and now I have a new roof.

Keep scrolling, I was being facetious

I try to minimize how much I pay for insurance, but I still choose to carry homeowners and have term life I bought when my kids were young. I don't need it now.

Car insurance, homeowners insurance, flood insurance, term life insurance, whole life insurance, Auto liability, auto collision insurance, auto comprehensive insurance, umbrella liability insurance, long term disability insurance, short term disability insurance, car warranty, appliance warranties, home maintenance warranties, long term care insurance. computer warranties, smart phone warranties, business general liability insurance, errors and omissions

stop the madness.

BTW, my dad has owned his house since 1983, when he paid cash for it, and has never carried insurance since day one.

Assuming he would have taken a 2% deductible policy over that time, he's probably only saved about $50,000 (2% deductible insurance was also a lot cheaper; along with everything, back then). Figuring investing that over the time, maybe he's $300,000 to the good. That's more than twice what he paid for the house, but due to inflation, that's only enough to cover a partial rebuild. At $200/sf, he'd need about $400,000 to rebuild a total structure loss.

So, this strategy only works if you never experience a total loss (but how many of those ever happen?). Personal liability is another thing. But, again, how many homeowner's policies actually have to pay our heavy 6 figures or more due to a slip/fall type claim?

(edit for compounding)

aggiebrad94 said:

---

rlb28 said:

---

Except you don't have to buy insurance

---

'splain

---

First world problems. Nobody is making us buy new cars or finance large homes. You could pay cash for a used car or rent a home, negating the high cost of insurance.

Yes, the state is making you have liability insurance, but you could get that on a beater car for around $60 a month, which nobody would complain about.

We don't have to have river houses and beach houses that require flood insurance. Or live in coastal towns that require windstorm insurance. I'm being facetious as well, but it's kind of true.

rlb28 said:

---

aggiebrad94 said:

---

rlb28 said:

---

Except you don't have to buy insurance

---

'splain

---

First world problems. Nobody is making us buy new cars or finance large homes. You could pay cash for a used car or rent a home, negating the high cost of insurance.

Yes, the state is making you have liability insurance, but you could get that on a beater car for around $60 a month, which nobody would complain about.

We don't have to have river houses and beach houses that require flood insurance. Or live in coastal towns that require windstorm insurance. I'm being facetious as well, but it's kind of true.

---

I'll push back on this part here I bolded. Owners will pass the bulk of the insurance cost, if not all of it, down the line to renters.

I'll say to you too..when you're able to self insure sounds like that's what you want to do. I personally believe in insurance before I even got into the field.

Point taken

If you rent a home, you're paying for homeowners insurance indirectly. I have a rental in Bryan and I'm that case I'm more apt to get insurance

I'm just saying someone can get carried away and spend a high percentage of their income in insurance and warranties

rlb28 said:

---

Captain Winky said:

---

I don't know if I am just being more observant, but it seems like the number of PI lawyer billboards has exploded. It seems like every other billboard is now an advertisement for one of them.

---

True! the Texas hammer, has billboards all the way down here in Angleton and I saw them up near Dallas as well.

---

As a chemist I can't help but get a nerdy chuckle when I see a billboard with Abogado's number on it.

I see how that scenario benefits the roofer but how does that scenario make the carrier money?

Edit: looks like you edited. I was responding to your support for the claim that roofers and carriers are in league with each other

Captain Winky said:

---

I don't know if I am just being more observant, but it seems like the number of PI lawyer billboards has exploded. It seems like every other billboard is now an advertisement for one of them.

---

This is not accurate. In San Antonio and in certain parts of Houston, all billboards are PI attorneys. I can't speak to Dallas and Austin, but I'm guessing it isn't much different there.

You said stop the madness. But auto and home insurance is all the folks are legally required to carry… Nobody is making them purchase those supplemental policies.