[Pre-paid legal service] vs CHL Protection Plan

[Commander]

I've been comparing [pre-paid legal] and CHLPP. It seems that [pre-paid legal] has better coverage as they will represent you in civil trials and criminal trials. CHLPP will only represent you up to the time of indictment. Their rates are similar.

Anyone have any experience or thoughts on this? I'm thinking about subscribing to [pre-paid legal].

[RoyGBiv]

I think you hit the nail on the head... [pre-paid legal] is complete representation through both Criminal and Civil, plus they've added some coverage for appeals. CHLPP is much less coverage, but they DO cover you out of state, where [pre-paid legal] does not.

I was entirely put off by the CHLPP web site... It screams "cheesy", especially that "Badge" they're offering.

If [pre-paid legal] would provide coverage out of state, even for double the price it would be an easy choice, IMO

[RoyGBiv]

I also found this one interesting.. For $85/year...
Not completely clear on what they will actually cover... Might be worth a call...
Might also be a good backup for out of state coverage on top of [pre-paid legal]..



http://www.armedcitizensnetwork.org/home" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[rmr1923]

I signed up for [pre-paid legal] at the end of my CHL course, those of us who were interested stayed for a presentation video and received their "platinum" coverage... same legal coverage but our annual "retainer" will never increase. I was impressed with the level of coverage, considering they would represent you in both criminal and civil courts. The out-of-state coverage wasn't really an issue for me as I rarely travel out of the state of Texas (we go to Louisiana maybe once or twice a year, and we spend the majority of our time in places of business where we're prohibited from carrying anyway).

[sugar land dave]

I also signed up for [pre-paid legal] at my CHL class. Of course I had the advantage of living near Houston and thus my instructor had a more personal understanding of the lawyers involved. I bought the platinum. For less than the cost of one trip to the movies per month, I can have some peace of mind should I ever have to use my weapon.

But mostly I didn't want to be in a situation of second guessing myself due to potential legal costs. In a necessary defense situation, one second of hesitation can well be the difference in who leaves the incident physically unharmed.

[MostlyHarmless]

Personally, I'd only consider a plan that paid me cash to pay my own attorney of choice. Any program that promises to provide legal services directly creates a conflict of interest -- my interest will be to have the most competent, most thorough legal defense possible whereas their interest will be cost control (i.e. using a minimum amount of labor of the greenest/cheapest attorney possible). Otherwise, I might as well take the assigned public defender.

Of the programs being mentioned, I believe only the Armed Citizen's Network pays out cash to my chosen attorney. However, benefits are capped at $10,000 -- a fraction of what you'll need if your case went to trial but probably enough to carry you through questioning, depositions and a decision whether to proceed by a grand jury. They have a foundation you can apply to get more benefits, but there's no guarantee the foundation will take on your case and no disclosure of the finances of that foundation, so in my opinion that added benefit is too vague to be considered as part of the Armed Citizen's Network's value proposition (there's also a story on their website where the foundation took on a case for a non-member).

Unfortunately, no one gets to know whether they're going to need insurance before they have to decide to buy it. But, you can tease a probability or two out of the numbers to help you make a decision. At $85/year for the membership, and assuming a full $10k payout, mathematically you should buy the policy if you think your probability is greater than 0.85% of getting involved in a "complicated" shooting in the coming year ($85 / $10,000). Personally, I think my odds are way lower than that, especially since I plan to do everything possible to avoid such an unfortunate situation -- I fully expect most people here do. Moreover, you may be involved in an "uncomplicated" shooting -- one which is dismissed fairly quickly, so you don't end up collecting the full $10k benefit. Mathematically, this has the effect of lowering the 0.85% figure -- in other words, statistically you should buy the package if your probability of getting involved in a shooting in the next year is somewhere less than that 0.85%. It's hard to take these particular numbers farther without knowing more about average legal bills for average shooting incidents.

But, there are other ways to look at this. For example, consider that there are approximately 300,000 CHL holders in Texas (round figure guesstimate). Let's stick with the conservative 0.85% number. At that incident rate, CHL holders should be buying the Armed Citizen's insurance if we're seeing 2,550 CHL shootings in Texas each year (300,000 * 0.85%). It's pretty apparent that we're not seeing that level of activity -- Texas has about 122,000 violent crimes per year, and 2,550 would mean that 2% of all (reported) violent crimes ended up in a CHL shooting. Um, don't think so, no. To be fair, though, there may be 300,000 CHL license holders, but many don't carry regularly. I don't know any actual data for carry percentages, but I suspect the actual carry rate is pretty low and that the carry rate for the people on this forum is above average.

Lastly, I'm not trying to tell someone whether they should buy insurance. The math can't tell you that, either, even though we know intuitively that it doesn't make financial sense for the average CHL-holder to buy insurance because if it did, the Armed Citizen's Network would quickly run out of cash and go out of business. What you're really buying is peace of mind, considering a sense of your own individual risk and your personal financial circumstances, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Cheers!

[i8godzilla]

Personally, I'd only consider a plan that paid me cash to pay my own attorney of choice. Any program that promises to provide legal services directly creates a conflict of interest -- my interest will be to have the most competent, most thorough legal defense possible whereas their interest will be cost control (i.e. using a minimum amount of labor of the greenest/cheapest attorney possible). Otherwise, I might as well take the assigned public defender.

---snip---

Cheers!

The T&C, to me, say [Pre-paid legal service] can find a way to get out of representing anyone they choose.

https://www.[Pre-paid legal service].com/terms_chl.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
If during the course of the Firm representing the Client, under the terms of this agreement, a conflict of interest arises in which there is a substantial risk that the Firm’s representation of the client would be materially and adversely affected by the lawyer’s duties to another current client, a former client, a third person, or the Firm’s own interests, the Firm believes that a conflict of interest exists between the Firm’s continued representation of the Client has arisen, the Firm shall immediately give notice to that client and the Firm shall promptly withdraw from the representation of Client. If a conflict arises as described above, the Firm shall cease all representation of the Client to comply with any and all Texas Rules of...

Then there is Section VI of the contract. It states they can cancel the program "for whatever reason". You only get a pro-rated return of the micro retainer.

So, sounds like it it is a tough case, they can find a way out of representing you.

[ELB]

Previous discussions fyi:

FAQ: Lawyers, Pre-paid Legal, CHL Insurance

[Springbike]

I signed up for [pre-paid legal] also at the end of my CHL class. Here's why...
1. Carrying a gun is life insurance. We do so to protect ourselves and our families.
2. Legal representation is similar to health or auto insurance insurance. I hope I dont need it but if I do need it I have it. The average hospital stay is $750,000. The average shooting defense is easily $20,000, just for a Grand Jury billing.
3. Each of us probably spend anout $100 each time we go to the range to practice our proficientcy so we don't accidentally shoot a bystander. This legal representation also helps in case we do....

Mostleyharmless - I don't mean to be argumentative but I don't know where you get your figures. I believe Texas has over 1 million CHL holders. Last year there were 102,133 new holders added. There were 61,260 total convictions in Texas. Of that 160 convictions involved CHL holders representing .2612% of all convictions. But this isn't the point... The point is is you have any assets you would be best served to have insurance.

[The Annoyed Man]

...I don't mean to be argumentative but I don't know where you get your figures. I believe Texas has over 1 million CHL holders.

The most recent figures show something like 450,000 active CHLs issued. I don't remember the exact figure, but I'm pretty sure that it is under 500,000. In round numbers, it's on the order of 1.5% of the state's population of around 25,000,000.

[MostlyHarmless]

...I don't mean to be argumentative but I don't know where you get your figures. I believe Texas has over 1 million CHL holders.

The most recent figures show something like 450,000 active CHLs issued. I don't remember the exact figure, but I'm pretty sure that it is under 500,000. In round numbers, it's on the order of 1.5% of the state's population of around 25,000,000.

I didn't care to spend a ton of time look, but a quick search online came back with a 2006 number of something like 260,000 Texas residents having a CHL. I didn't see a more recent figure. If there are more of us, great!

No offense perceived. Anyone can rerun the math with their own assumptions. And, as I said, I was never trying to argue that people shouldn't buy a plan (well, maybe not the ones which promise to come defend you); I was just trying to inform the debate. I buy fire insurance for my house, and statistically it doesn't pay for itself, either...

Bests!

[Springbike]

I stand corrected. The CHL holder figure as of Dec 31, 2010 stands at 461,724. For those that are interested in the figures you can find a lot of stats on the Texas state CHL site.

[Charles L. Cotton]

The average hospital stay is $750,000. The average shooting defense is easily $20,000, just for a Grand Jury billing.

Where did you get this figure? Does it include only cases that went to a Grand Jury with a defendant who had an attorney? How many self-defense cases go to a Grand Jury with a defendant who has no attorney? (I'm using the term "defendant" very loosely since one is not a "defendant" until charged.)

As I've said many times, I would never counsel against someone getting any insurance coverage or pre-paid legal "coverage" they choose, but make sure you know what you are getting and not getting. Oh, be sure to check the advertising claims also.

Chas.

[Mr.ViperBoa]

I have never heard of either of these. Is this something my instructor should have told me about?
I never really thought about needing coverage for civil reasons. I always figure if I am going to pull my pistol its only going to be for the right reasons,
and if thats the case and its a clean shoot, you are immune from civil arent you?
Thats what I was taught in class.

CPRC § 83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY. A defendant who uses force or
deadly force that is justified under Chapter 9, Penal Code, is immune
from civil liability for personal injury or death that results from the
defendant's use of force or deadly force, as applicable.

[rmr1923]

I have never heard of either of these. Is this something my instructor should have told me about?
I never really thought about needing coverage for civil reasons. I always figure if I am going to pull my pistol its only going to be for the right reasons,
and if thats the case and its a clean shoot, you are immune from civil arent you?
Thats what I was taught in class.

CPRC § 83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY. A defendant who uses force or
deadly force that is justified under Chapter 9, Penal Code, is immune
from civil liability for personal injury or death that results from the
defendant's use of force or deadly force, as applicable.

from what i hear, it's possible to be found immune from criminal and civil liability and still rack up quite a few bucks in legal expenses in the process