Teen Crash Risk Highest First 3 Months After Getting License

There are at least three reasons for an individual to purchase a personal umbrella policy.

To begin with, the primary policies otherwise available generally do not provide liability limits commensurate with the exposure such individuals may face.

Second, the cost of this excess coverage is comparatively cheap.

Third (and perhaps most importantly), umbrella policies not only provide coverage when losses exceed the available primary limits, but add coverage for certain types of losses, such as "personal injury" claims that generally not covered by primary policies.

Although the limits of homeowners and other forms of personal primary insurance have increased, most only provide coverage with "per occurrence" limits of $300,000 or $500,000. Some companies offer increased limits of liability to $1,000,000. Substantial as that may seem, it is hardly sufficient to satisfy the liability an insured may face due to a serious accident.

Umbrella coverage is also surprisingly affordable. As a result, umbrella insurers are willing to quote coverage of $1 million to as much as $10 million at rates that are proportionally cheaper than primary insurance. Umbrella carriers can quote coverage with the confidence that statistics show their insureds are unlikely to be sued, and any resulting suits are likely to be resolved within the limits of the insured's primary coverage.

Umbrella insurance not only boosts available coverage limits at a relatively advantageous cost compared to dollar limits on primary policies, but it does so with respect to a portfolio of primary risks. Thus, an insured has excess coverage available for serious auto or premises liability claims without having to pay to increase limits on their primary insurance policies that would insure these separate risks.

Umbrella insurance presents a particular feature that separates it from other types of excess insurance.

Umbrella policies (deemed "bumbershoot" policies in the London market) not only provide insurance coverage once the primary limits are exhausted, but they drop down to provide primary coverage for certain types of losses that may not be covered under the insured's primary policy.

For instance, umbrella policies typically include "personal injury" coverage for quasi-intentional tort losses, such as claims for wrongful entry or eviction, defamation or disparagement and malicious prosecution or false arrest that many homeowners policies do not cover. Umbrella policies may also define "bodily injury" to include claims for emotional distress that primary policies do not cover. In these cases, the umbrella insurer will step in to defend the underlying claim and fill the gaps in the insured's coverage profile that might otherwise prove expensive and perilous.

While the decision to purchase umbrella coverage should be an obvious one for most policyholders, deciding whether to buy umbrella coverage from the same company that underwrites your primary policies may be more difficult. Some primary insurers may be willing to discount the cost of such insurance when the policyholder agrees to buy a package of policies. Using the same insurer may also avoid a seamless web of insurance and avoid unexpected gaps due to conflicting wordings.

At the same time, having a different insurer write the excess coverage may be a benefit to the insureds in cases where the primary insurer is reluctant to accept coverage and the excess insurer acts in concert with the policyholder to apply pressure to the primary carrier to pay the loss or defend the case.

Personal umbrella policies can help customize insurance coverage by filling gaps in a client's coverage profile and raise the limits of coverage to safer levels. In short, the answer to the question of whether an insured should buy personal umbrella insurance is not "yes", you should" but rather, "why on earth would you not."

The Albuquerque, New Mexico metropolitan statistical area (MSA) repeats as having the highest per capita auto theft rate in 2017, according to the National Insurance Crime Bureau’s (NICB) latest Hot Spots report.

New to the top 10 this year, the metro areas of St. Joseph, (No. 5) and Springfield, Missouri (No. 10).

NICB notes that an area with a much smaller population and a moderate number of thefts can—and often does—have a higher theft rate than an area with a much more significant vehicle theft problem and a larger population to absorb it. That is how St. Joseph, with 952 thefts, places 5th while Los Angeles, with 60,444 thefts, places 33rd.

Hot Spots examines vehicle theft data obtained from the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) for each of the nation’s MSAs. MSAs are designated by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and often include areas much larger than the cities for which they are named. For example, this year’s number one spot, the Albuquerque, N.M. MSA, includes all thefts within the entire county of Bernalillo, not just the city of Albuquerque.

For 2017, the 10 MSAs with the highest vehicle theft rates were: (thefts in parentheses)

Each year the FBI releases preliminary Uniform Crime Report (UCR) data for the previous year’s January–June time frame. When the preliminary 2017 crime data was released earlier this year, vehicle theft was up 4.1 percent across the nation. NICB said that increase is reflected in this Hot Spots report and it expects that to hold when the final UCR 2017 crime data is published in the fall.

Overall, vehicle theft is down, dramatically, across the nation. The historic peak year for vehicle theft was 1991, with 1,661,738 reported thefts. In 2016, the total was 765,484. That is a 54 percent reduction since 1991.

 While the final result for 2017 is expected to be higher than 2016’s number (although the rate of increase is decreasing), the vehicle theft environment across the country has improved significantly since the 1990s.