[Pre-paid legal service] and Pre-Paid Legal

[phrogg]

So at the gun show this weekend in Houston I ran across a booth from a guy with [Pre-paid legal service]. They have a program where you pay a $10.95/mo retainer and they cover all legal fees if you (as a CHL) use your gun in the state of Texas. With that they state that they cover your police investigation, Bonding issues, Grand Jury, and possibly criminal trial. What I notice is absent is the likely civil trial that would more than likely follow.

Anybody use this service? Or perhaps pre-paid legal? It looks like they have a similar service but their number of hours is limited in the trial phase.

Thoughts and opinions?

[AEA]

Although I doubt they cover what you say, the likelihood of a civil trial is almost nill on a good shot.

[almostfree]

I don't know anything about [Pre-paid legal service], but it is my opinion that prepaid legal is a scam. There have been a lot of accusations of fraud and the service not living up to its claims, and it has also been accused of being a pyramid scheme. It is my understanding that it is almost impossible to get the services they are supposedly selling you. For my money, I'd rather just have an attorney on retainer.

Here is a video explanation from a former U.S. attorney talking about pre-paid legal.

http://www.sequenceinc.com/fraudfiles/2 ... -attorney/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This was marketed to me by a company that I used to work for as a "benefit". They would not let you read the contract unless you had already agreed to sign up for the service. The woman giving the presentation got visibly hostile when someone took one of the packets and started reading it. We found out later that the owners of the company had gotten caught up in the pyramid scheme by an outside company they hired to manage their benefits. It was one of the many reasons that I quit, because instead of getting themselves and the company out of it honorably they tried to market it to us very aggressively. I wasn't interested at all from the get go, but it made my wife very angry and she did a lot of research into prepaid legal and their "services". She confronted the owners of the company about it and they mumbled some gibberish to get her to go away.

[phrogg]

... the likelihood of a civil trial is almost nill on a good shot.

Well, tell that to OJ

[AEA]

OJ was a murderer.
Do some research on bills passed by the Texas Legislature and you will see for yourself that Texas has made it no longer a real concern.

[mactex]

Although I doubt they cover what you say, the likelihood of a civil trial is almost nill on a good shot.

Maybe I've not followed all the laws recently, but my understanding is that a civil suit can still be filed (heck, anyone can file a civil suit for almost any reason) and the costs associated with highering an attorney to get the the case thrown out (because of the current laws) still exist. The laws really only protect you from a trial if you have an attorney who can argue to get the process stopped early on.

[gigag04]

it is my opinion that prepaid legal is a scam

Disagree. TMPA and CLEAT are great. Different member base, but same principle.

[AEA]

Although I doubt they cover what you say, the likelihood of a civil trial is almost nill on a good shot.

Maybe I've not followed all the laws recently, but my understanding is that a civil suit can still be filed (heck, anyone can file a civil suit for almost any reason) and the costs associated with highering an attorney to get the the case thrown out (because of the current laws) still exist. The laws really only protect you from a trial if you have an attorney who can argue to get the process stopped early on.

You are completely wrong on your assessment. No sensible attorney will even attempt a civil suit in Texas with regard to a good shot by a CHL after a Grand Jury dismisses all charges.

[joe817]

Although I doubt they cover what you say, the likelihood of a civil trial is almost nill on a good shot.

Maybe I've not followed all the laws recently, but my understanding is that a civil suit can still be filed (heck, anyone can file a civil suit for almost any reason) and the costs associated with highering an attorney to get the the case thrown out (because of the current laws) still exist. The laws really only protect you from a trial if you have an attorney who can argue to get the process stopped early on.

You are completely wrong on your assessment. No sensible attorney will even attempt a civil suit in Texas with regard to a good shot by a CHL after a Grand Jury dismisses all charges.

AEA is correct. Because of this, found in Civil Practice and Remedies Code:

"CPRC Ch.83. Use of Deadly Force In Defense of Person

CHAPTER 83. USE OF DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON

Sec. 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.

Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 235, Sec. 2, eff. Sept. 1, 1995."
Amended by: Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. 1, Sec. 4, eff. September 1, 2007."

[Greybeard]

Yea, I agree on the "scam" thing on most of em. I keep gettin e-mails from a CHL Instructor, no less, in Houston using the "civil liability" scare tactics to promote pre-paid legal. Sadly, lots of other CHL instructors are pushin another program that, in my not-so-humble-opinion, does more for their bank account than it does for protecting license holders.

[AEA]

I'm beginning to think they are pushing it here.........

Two different threads about this type of "Insurance" and some of the posts giving all the "benefits" makes me think that they are pushing it here indirectly........sparking peeps interest......a few fish may bite.......

[KFP]

Although I doubt they cover what you say, the likelihood of a civil trial is almost nill on a good shot.

Maybe I've not followed all the laws recently, but my understanding is that a civil suit can still be filed (heck, anyone can file a civil suit for almost any reason) and the costs associated with highering an attorney to get the the case thrown out (because of the current laws) still exist. The laws really only protect you from a trial if you have an attorney who can argue to get the process stopped early on.

You are completely wrong on your assessment. No sensible attorney will even attempt a civil suit in Texas with regard to a good shot by a CHL after a Grand Jury dismisses all charges.

I'll state my opinion that you are both correct. You can not be denied the right to file a civil suit and no sensible attorney would file a civil suit.

Sec. 9.06. CIVIL REMEDIES UNAFFECTED. The fact that conduct is justified under this chapter does not abolish or impair any remedy for the conduct that is available in a civil suit.

[phrogg]

I'm beginning to think they are pushing it here.........

Two different threads about this type of "Insurance" and some of the posts giving all the "benefits" makes me think that they are pushing it here indirectly........sparking peeps interest......a few fish may bite.......

I just brought it up because I ran into the guy at the Gun Show over the weekend. It spurred a question in my mind.

As far as a civil suit goes though, I see that an Umbrella Liability Policy from whomever is doing your insurance is probably a better plan anyway.

But what about the criminal piece of a good shoot? Has someone here had to deal with that and the costs? What does it cost to get to the point of being cleared? Whatever the costs, I'd have to say its worth it because you had to take the shot. Therefore the consequences of not taking that shot were much worse.

[Greybeard]

Quote: "I see that an Umbrella Liability Policy from whomever is doing your insurance is probably a better plan anyway."

Very careful there too. Read the fine print regarding "Exclusions" and "Intentional Acts". If that's not clear to you, get an attorney to explain it to you (rather than the guy selling you the umbrella policy).

[sjfcontrol]

My understanding is that an umbrella policy would NOT offer protection, as "Intentional Acts" are typically not covered. So, I guess, unless your "good" shooting happened to also be accidental -- no coverage.