TexasCHLforum.com

rotor wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:
$200 per year multiplied by the extremely low probability that the service gets used? Sure, they can easily afford a good lawyer for you. It's just like insurance. Do I really think that the insurance company will pay me $400,000 to replace my house if it burns down even though I am only paying a tiny fraction of that amount in annual premiums? Why yes, I do. Should I think about that again? Maybe, but I will probably reach the same conclusion.

The fact is that if you want to self insure for these risks, you can (where legally allowed). And you will probably be better off. The exact amount that you will probably be better off is equal to the insurance companies overhead costs + profit divided by the number of policy holders (otherwise known as Expected Value, or EV). To put it in terms of statistics / gambling, your EV is higher by self insuring (unless you find an insurance company with really bad actuaries), but your variance is also dramatically lower by insuring. You are paying the insurance company for this reduction in variance.

I agree with this assessment. I think that these companies realize that there is a very low probability of needing to "pay out" and that this is a very lucrative business. The NRA has jumped in big time with television advertising and there are multiple companies involved. Insurance, prepaid legal, call it what you want but the only reason these companies are doing this is because there is money to be made. It's not like being told by state insurance commission that you must insure gulf coast homes for hurricanes. If they can charge $200 per Texas LTC carrier and only 10% of Texas LTC sign up that is still 100,000 people and that is $20,000,000 if my calculator is right. You can buy a few lawyers with that kind of money.

There is a reason why Warren Buffet owns insurance companies.

superstar wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:
$200 per year multiplied by the extremely low probability that the service gets used? Sure, they can easily afford a good lawyer for you. It's just like insurance. Do I really think that the insurance company will pay me $400,000 to replace my house if it burns down even though I am only paying a tiny fraction of that amount in annual premiums? Why yes, I do. Should I think about that again? Maybe, but I will probably reach the same conclusion.

The fact is that if you want to self insure for these risks, you can (where legally allowed). And you will probably be better off. The exact amount that you will probably be better off is equal to the insurance companies overhead costs + profit divided by the number of policy holders (otherwise known as Expected Value, or EV). To put it in terms of statistics / gambling, your EV is higher by self insuring (unless you find an insurance company with really bad actuaries), but your variance is also dramatically lower by insuring. You are paying the insurance company for this reduction in variance.

The insurance analogy was good, but let's say instead of housing insurance is medical insurance. Just because you pay for the medical insurance does not mean you will get the best doctor, you will get the doctor they recommend. Is it a bargain for $200 per year to have a legal service? of course it is. Would it be a great lawyer they recommend? Only you will know when the case ends. Would you bet your life (behind bars) on it? I wouldn't. I would research the best attorney that my money could buy and if you find that said atty. retainer's fee is $30K I'm pretty confident that they will take installments and not touch your case until their fee is paid. A much better scenario in my opinion where you have complete control on who you would want to represent you than what a legal service recommends.

Personally, I self insure for this risk for a number of reasons, including the fact that I am lucky enough to be able to come up with $30k in the unlikely event that I need to do so. But the correct answer for me is not necessarily the correct answer for anyone else. The likelihood of you needing legal counsel for a SD shooting is extremely low. If one can come up with a decent amount of cash, somehow, to cover themselves should that ever happen, then they might want to self insure. If they can't, then a service like this one might make sense. And note that I said "come up with". Not "easily afford". Come up with includes things like taking out a second mortgage, selling off assets like a second vehicle, etc.

But yes, I am sure that the insurance provider (medical or otherwise) will try to minimize their payouts wherever possible. My medical insurance provider's latest thing is mandating that I pay an extra fee (over and above the annual out of pocket "max") if I want to get my prescriptions at a pharmacy instead of mail order. So if one does get insurance for any risk, they should make sure they fully understand all of the terms and conditions. Including the ability to choose your own attorney, or knowing exactly who the service will provide for you.

superstar wrote:

rotor wrote: Apparently an attorney can't go with you into a grand jury regardless of the service used. So that part doesn't matter. How much is a little money? $30,000 is more than a little money. I don't know the answer to the question as to what method of prepaid or insurance is best and I have never heard of anyone involved with a legal issue complain about their service. I think these are profit making services for those groups sponsoring it.
I think ideally that we would need to hear from LTC holders that have been involved with "the law" as to how their experience actually was with these plans. Since we are all such outstanding citizens there are probably very few of us that could relate to those services. I would like to keep it that way.

Let's say you get the service with Multi-state, bail bond plus the one time fee of $20 + $200 = $220. Anyone here believe that by paying $200 annually will get you a $30K legal service (that's the general consensus here of a competent lawyer's fee) should think about that again.

They should read and inquire about those "expert testimonials fee, court fees, etc fees" and speak to the actual attorney that might be representing them. I believe that most LTC holders are here to follow the law of the land, mores and will probably won't need those services, but there are some that just need that piece of mind when they pay for something that they think it will be an all inclusive package. As others noted. Read and if something is not clear to you, call and ask. They should time how long it takes for them to get a clear response that might be a good indicative point if they call for legal help.

$200 per year multiplied by the extremely low probability that the service gets used? Sure, they can easily afford a good lawyer for you. It's just like insurance. Do I really think that the insurance company will pay me $400,000 to replace my house if it burns down even though I am only paying a tiny fraction of that amount in annual premiums? Why yes, I do. Should I think about that again? Maybe, but I will probably reach the same conclusion.

The fact is that if you want to self insure for these risks, you can (where legally allowed). And you will probably be better off. The exact amount that you will probably be better off is equal to the insurance companies overhead costs + profit divided by the number of policy holders (otherwise known as Expected Value, or EV). To put it in terms of statistics / gambling, your EV is higher by self insuring (unless you find an insurance company with really bad actuaries), but your variance is also dramatically lower by insuring. You are paying the insurance company for this reduction in variance.