Pros Cons for CHL Insurance & Recommendations

[RetiredE9]

This is follow-on to an earlier thread I posted regarding CHL insurance. In 2007 I purchase an "insurance" (it's not really described as insurance so I'm not sure I should call it that) plan that guaranteed me free legal representation all the way through a Grand Jury if I was involved in a CHL shooting incident. Apparently if the Grand Jury indicted me, I was on my own after that; fair enough, the premise was that I was an innocent shooter involved in a murky legal process.

I thought it sounded like a good idea since my liability insurance didn't extend to that. I signed up and thought I was covered. Now I have my doubts and I'm debating whether to renew or not. Website here

http://www.chlpp.com/index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

My question is this. Does anyone here have a similar protection plan? Can you recommend another protection plan provider? Or do I need such protection at all? I would think that some protection would be a good thing if only to get me through a potential legal process without incurring additional legal fees.

Suggestions? Comments?

[Kythas]

I and a co-worker are both members of this plan. My co-worker has personally spoken with the guy who runs it and has been assured that it covers all legal expenses resulting from a legal self-defense use of force, up to and including the grand jury. Your bail, though, is not covered and is your responsibility should you be arrested.

[kP380]

kythas, are you still a member of the CHLPP? I am waiting for my CHL in the mail, and was just wondering how many have considered CHL insurance, and have renewed it more than once (thus continuing to feel the need for it).

I'm very conservative and the hundred bucks a year for the insurance SEEMS like a good deal...

[b322da]

Does anyone here have a similar protection plan? Can you recommend another protection plan provider? Or do I need such protection at all? I would think that some protection would be a good thing if only to get me through a potential legal process without incurring additional legal fees.

Suggestions? Comments?

I have subscribed to an NRA endorsed insurance plan which includes both Excess Personal Liability and Self-defense coverage, after my review of alternatives, and taking into account my personal situation. I subscribed to the maximum coverage authorized, that being generally $250,000. For me, a retired LEO, the premium is only $205 annually. I do not know what the premium is for persons not being retired LEOs. This web site should answer that question. To me the fact that this coverage is endorsed by the NRA is meaningful.

http://www.locktonaffinity.com/nrains/defense.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Your being a retired E9 I think I can confidently presume you to be a very responsible individual. That is not a rank handed out willy-nilly to just everyone in our military. Your attitude and concern as you asked your question affirms my conclusion. You appreciate the risk you have assumed as a CHL-holder, and you understand the financial exposure you might have under a worst-case scenario. Many individuals I have known who share those attributes, after a serious study, will consider insuring their exposure to the maximum extent they can afford, limited, of course, by their perception of their exposure.

This is not an endorsement of this coverage as compared to others available. It may have weaknesses here and there, as does every insurance policy ever written. I have not, thank goodness, had occasion to call upon the coverage, so my experience with it is nil, but I sleep better at night for having it. Your circumstances may be drastically different from mine, and this is a very subjective decision you are faced with. The fine print in insurance policies can be a nightmare to interpret, and everyone should give serious consideration to having his or her alternatives reviewed by a reliable and credible advisor. I might here open the door to some reasonable criticism by noting that an insurance broker, unless you know him or her well, may not be the best advisor, keeping in mind that a broker, to the best of my knowledge, cannot get a commission from selling this particular policy. Being retired military I will assume you are familiar with USAA, which also has no middle-men between them and you when it comes to their coverages.

I have gone on longer than necessary here, but I hope my views may cause others to consider their risks and exposure as CHL-holders, leading them into at least looking into insurance coverage.

[OldCannon]

Locton Risk also insures NRA Instructors.

[Crossfire]

I have subscribed to an NRA endorsed insurance plan which includes both Excess Personal Liability and Self-defense coverage, after my review of alternatives, and taking into account my personal situation. I subscribed to the maximum coverage authorized, that being generally $250,000. For me, a retired LEO, the premium is only $205 annually. I do not know what the premium is for persons not being retired LEOs. This web site should answer that question. To me the fact that this coverage is endorsed by the NRA is meaningful.

http://www.locktonaffinity.com/nrains/defense.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

$250,000 coverage is $254 annually for non-LEO, $165 for $100,000 policy

[Winchster]

This is follow-on to an earlier thread I posted regarding CHL insurance. In 2007 I purchase an "insurance" (it's not really described as insurance so I'm not sure I should call it that) plan that guaranteed me free legal representation all the way through a Grand Jury if I was involved in a CHL shooting incident. Apparently if the Grand Jury indicted me, I was on my own after that; fair enough, the premise was that I was an innocent shooter involved in a murky legal process.

I thought it sounded like a good idea since my liability insurance didn't extend to that. I signed up and thought I was covered. Now I have my doubts and I'm debating whether to renew or not. Website here

http://www.chlpp.com/index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

My question is this. Does anyone here have a similar protection plan? Can you recommend another protection plan provider? Or do I need such protection at all? I would think that some protection would be a good thing if only to get me through a potential legal process without incurring additional legal fees.

Suggestions? Comments?

http://www.[Pre-paid legal service].com These people will be your attorney through trial, both criminal and civil, if you are an "innocent shooter involved in a murky legal process". It's cheaper too.

[b322da]

http://www.[Pre-paid legal service].com These people will be your attorney through trial, both criminal and civil, if you are an "innocent shooter involved in a murky legal process". It's cheaper too.

This points out helpfully, Winchester, my point about different folks, different insurance choices and needs. I deemed liability coverage as an important element for me; not just paying for a lawyer, so of course "it's cheaper too," as one would expect. This is the kind of distinction all should consider when (if) making a choice of alternatives. I went one way on this question, and you apparently went another way. I do appreciate your pointing out this difference, and I think it is one all should consider based on their own circumstances, needs and financial capacity. I certainly could not say that my choice was better than yours -- just that one makes his choice and pays for it.

Best regards,

[Winchster]

http://www.[Pre-paid legal service].com These people will be your attorney through trial, both criminal and civil, if you are an "innocent shooter involved in a murky legal process". It's cheaper too.

This points out helpfully, Winchester, my point about different folks, different insurance choices and needs. I deemed liability coverage as an important element for me; not just paying for a lawyer, so of course "it's cheaper too," as one would expect. This is the kind of distinction all should consider when (if) making a choice of alternatives. I went one way on this question, and you apparently went another way. I do appreciate your pointing out this difference, and I think it is one all should consider based on their own circumstances, needs and financial capacity. I certainly could not say that my choice was better than yours -- just that one makes his choice and pays for it.

Best regards,

I wasn't bashing your choice at all. I'm curious as to what the difference is between "insurance" and the attorney option I pointed out. Is the liability coverage for civil liability protection? If so, why do we need it since the law was changed in 2007? (No civil liability for justified self defense)

By the way, this was presented to us at my CHL class and it was my introduction to the concept, I have not looked into anything else. I am waiting on plastic now, so I'm open to other ideas.

[dalto]

I wasn't bashing your choice at all. I'm curious as to what the difference is between "insurance" and the attorney option I pointed out.

One provides you with a lawyer from a specified firm in the event of a problem. The other provides with general protection which could (hopefully) be used for legal costs and/or liability. You would need to read the specific agreement to understand what it covers.

Is the liability coverage for civil liability protection? If so, why do we need it since the law was changed in 2007? (No civil liability for justified self defense)

My understanding is that this protection only extends to your house car or place of business. Also, I don't think that there is anything to stop someone from suing you, you probably would still have costs defending the suit which you would hopefully win.

[Winchster]

One provides you with a lawyer from a specified firm in the event of a problem. The other provides with general protection which could (hopefully) be used for legal costs and/or liability. You would need to read the specific agreement to understand what it covers.

LOL, I got that after I went and actually read the page from the insurance page. I guess my only problem with it would be what if my defense costs more than 100k?

My understanding is that this protection only extends to your house car or place of business.

I may be wrong, but I don't see that. CPRC 83.001 simply grants me immunity if I use force that was justified under Chapter 9. Again, I may be wrong, it's happened once or twice, and I hope I never have to find out.

Also, I don't think that there is anything to stop someone from suing you, you probably would still have costs defending the suit which you would hopefully win.

Oh we can most definitely still be sued, however it "should" be dismissed by the judge immediately if we were "no-billed".