Posts Tagged ‘After’
Improved access to life insurance after genetic diagnosis of familial hypercholesterolaemia: cross-sectional postal questionnaire study
February 4th, 2012
Authors: Roeland Huijgen, Sietske JM Homsma, Barbara A Hutten, Iris Kindt, Maud N Vissers, John JP Kastelein
& Jan LA van Rijckevorsel (Source: European Journal of Human Genetics)
MedWorm Sponsor Message: Find the best January Sales in the UK.
Related Posts:
Tags: access, After, crosssectional, diagnosis, familial, genetic, hypercholesterolaemia, Improved, insurance, Life, postal, questionnaire, Study | 
No Comments »
After the disaster: Uninsured homeowners have little to fall back on
January 25th, 2012
Lori Johnston
The images of the tornadoes, floods, earthquakes, hurricanes and wildfires of 2011 remain seared in our memories. You might live in one of the areas battered by weather tragedies. Or you might have frantically checked on friends and relatives who were affected by natural disasters.
As Americans sorted through what was left of their homes in disaster-ravaged areas, many people filed insurance claims and undertook the rebuilding process. For some homeowners and renters, though, a lack of insurance added to the devastation.
In Bastrop County, Texas, for example, about 100 of the 1,600 homes damaged or destroyed in a September 2011 wildfire weren’t insured. What’s billed as the worst wildfire in Texas history caused insured losses of at least $ 325 million.
“It’s important to be able to have (insurance) to fall back on when a catastrophe strikes,” says Mark Hanna, a spokesman for the Insurance Council of Texas, a trade group.
 |
| About 100 of the 1,600 homes damaged or destroyed in a September 2011 wildfire in Bastrop County, Texas, weren’t insured. |
The mortgage factor
Homeowners normally are required to purchase insurance as part of the mortgage process. But some homeowners and renters don’t have the most basic coverage for what may be their biggest asset – shelter. An estimated 97 percent of homeowners have home insurance, but only 29 percent of renters have renter’s insurance, according to 2011 data from the Insurance Information Institute.
There’s a lot of awareness about home and renter’s insurance, but an “it won’t happen to me” mind-set still exists, says Tim Bowen, director of the homeowner operational team in MetLife Auto & Home’s claims department.
As home insurance premiums rise, with an increase of up to 5 percent predicted in 2012 by the Insurance Information Institute, more folks may end up opting out of coverage, if they have that choice. The average home insurance premium in 2011 was $ 956, compared with $ 536 in 2001, according to the Insurance Information Institute and National Association of Insurance Commissioners. Texas, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi and Oklahoma are the states with the highest home insurance premiums — states that have been hit hard in recent years by hurricanes, tornadoes or wildfires.
“We’re going to see more people uninsured,” Bach says. “The prices are getting so high. People are used to paying under $ 1,000 a year for their homeowner’s insurance. I believe that is going to be thing of the past, if it isn’t already in many areas.”
‘Something’s gotta give’
For a variety of reasons, some people choose not to purchase insurance. The main reason: cost. Folks either want to avoid the premiums or simply can’t afford them. People who own their homes outright usually understand they’re taking chances by being uninsured, but they think the savings are worthwhile and the risk of a disaster is small.
Bill Sims, who’s in his late 80s, owns his home outright in Boca Raton, Fla. He decided not to renew his home insurance and flood insurance several years ago when the costs tripled to $ 3,000 and the number of items covered decreased.
He told TV station WPTV in 2011: “It was just one more item. You keep having additional expenses until, finally, something’s gotta give.”
Older homeowners may lack coverage
Not being able to afford insurance is becoming more common, says Amy Bach, executive director of United Policyholders, a nonprofit group that assists insurance consumers. Why? Bach says it’s because insurance companies think the risks of covering homeowners are greater than in the past, stemming partly from major disasters and resulting in higher rates, especially in hurricane-prone coastal areas.
Some people can afford insurance, but if they own their homes and no lender is requiring coverage, they sometimes don’t buy it. Generally speaking, the homeowners in those cases are older and have lived in their homes for years, Bach says. Or recent buyers may have paid all cash for their properties, avoiding any mandated insurance.
“It is pretty rare that you don’t have insurance and you have a mortgage, and nobody got in touch with you to remind you that you were supposed to have it,” she says.
Other situations can involve people who inherited a home that has been paid off. In less common cases, the policy may have lapsed and the homeowner isn’t aware of it. When disaster strikes, they discover that the coverage isn’t there.
It’s best to review your property insurance policy annually with your insurance agent or company to make sure everything is in place and that you don’t need to change the amount of protection, especially if you’ve expanded or remodeled your home, according to the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America.
Coverage for renters
More landlords are requiring renters to buy insurance, although a MetLife Auto & Home study found that less than half of U.S. renters still don’t have coverage. A 2010 survey by MetLife uncovered two main reasons:
• 33 percent said the insurance was too expensive.
• 23 percent said they thought they were covered by their landlord’s insurance.
“They take for granted that they’re in a building or a structure and their contents will be protected. That’s not so,” Bowen says.
A policy held by a landlord typically will cover the structure, exterior and finishes of the home, not a renter’s possessions. A typical renter’s insurance policy costs $ 200 a year or less, according to MetLife.
“It’s more, I think, an oversight than it is just trying to avoid getting it,” Bowen says.
Bouncing back from a disaster
A standard home insurance policy will cover property lost or damaged in most natural disasters, according to the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America. Floods are the big exception; flood damage is covered under separate insurance. Having coverage also means homeowners will be reimbursed for the cost of temporary housing and food if authorities order them to evacuate. The same benefits generally apply to renters who have insurance.
Without insurance, homeowners and renters must rely on friends and family, government agencies and nonprofit groups to meet their needs after a disaster. “They’ve got to start all over again,” MetLife’s Bowen says.
Another source of disaster relief is faith-based charitable organizations. In the aftermath of the Texas wildfires, groups such as the Bastrop Christian Ministerial Alliance donated money to renters who didn’t have insurance.
Other uninsured homeowners use their savings or inheritances to recover. Another option is to sell the damaged home as a distressed lot or property – unlikely to recoup much money – or to let the bank foreclose on a damaged home, which can hurt your credit. “All things considered, the best thing is to buy insurance,” Bach says.
Troy Anderson
Mold mania swept the United States a decade ago after lawsuits filed by celebrities Ed McMahon, Erin Brockovich and Michael Jordan stoked fears about “killer mold.”
Now, a new threat has emerged – a “house-eating fungus” that can devour homes in months. But the devastating fungus known as poria incrassata pales in comparison to perhaps an even bigger danger – the fact that many home insurance policies now contain caps or other coverage limits on mold and fungus claims.
In a lawsuit that some experts say could have national ramifications, Los Angeles residents Walter and Judy Moore allege that their home insurer, Seattle-based Safeco Insurance Co., acted in bad faith and engaged in unfair competition. The Moores allege that the company initially said it would cover a poria claim, but then backed out after learning it would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to fix their 1,500-square-foot home. The two-bedroom, two-bathroom Mission Revival home was built in 1924; it sits in a quaint, upper-class neighborhood.
The couple alleges that Safeco told them a $ 10,000 coverage limit applied only to fungus cleanup costs, not to subsequent repairs, but then told them the $ 10,000 limit applied to all losses, including repairs.
A ‘huge insurance scam’?
“This is essentially a huge insurance scam we’ve uncovered where people are not getting what they are paying for,” says Judy, who managed the couple’s rental property in the south of France until they were recently forced to sell it after the fungus invasion. “I know we are not an isolated couple who have somehow had the incredibly bad luck to find out our $ 1 million home is really only insured for $ 10,000.”
Walter, a corporate trial attorney and a former Los Angeles mayoral candidate, alleges in the lawsuit that Safeco failed to disclose on its home insurance declarations, or summary, page the policy limitations for mold or fungus damage. Safeco wrote on its declarations page that the policy would pay hundreds of thousands of dollars — enough to rebuild the home — but an “Additional Property Coverage” provision states the company will pay only up to $ 10,000 for fungus damage and cleanup, Walter alleges.
The lawsuit was filed in February 2011 in Los Angeles Superior Court.
When consumers buy or renew a policy, Safeco sends them a California Residential Property Insurance Disclosure form – showing policy limits valued at hundreds of thousands of dollars. No mention is made of a $ 10,000 limit for any covered losses, Walter alleges.
“There are much broader ramifications for all consumers,” says Walter, a Georgetown University graduate and former editor of the Georgetown Law Journal. “I think if most consumers saw something on their declarations page that the policy limit could be as low as $ 10,000, they would switch insurance companies. You couldn’t replace your car for $ 10,000, much less your home.”
Safeco’s defense
Brenda Harrison, a spokeswoman for Safeco, declines to comment on the Moores’ suit. Safeco is a subsidiary of Liberty Mutual, a Fortune 100 company that’s the country’s fifth-largest property and casualty insurer.
 |
| Judy Moore stands in the under-repair home she shares with husband Walter. Judy says they’re victims of a “huge insurance scam.” |
Jeffrey Crowe, an attorney for Safeco, explained in court documents that the company investigated this “unusual” case and learned water had entered the house through a vent pipe on the roof that was cut during an earlier remodeling project. This allowed rain to seep behind the walls, permitting the wood-decaying fungus to grow. Safeco later determined the loss wasn’t covered because of the policy’s exclusion for “continuous or repeated seepage or leakage of water.” Although the declarations page didn’t identify the policy’s “Special Provisions” regarding fungus, Crowe says the company covers only as much as $ 10,000 for fungus-related losses.
The case was scheduled to go to trial Jan. 17, 2012, but the judge dropped that trial date. A new trial date hasn’t been set. The Moores have asked the judge to issue an injunction prohibiting Safeco from selling or renewing any home insurance policies in California until it revises its declarations pages and discloses the $ 10,000 fungus limit.
“They know this could do severe damage to them,” Judy says. “If we get a permanent injunction against Safeco that requires them to start telling the truth about what they are selling then there could class-action lawsuits in every state. It would not be, ‘Do you owe people money, but how much do you owe every single one of your policyholders?’”
‘Hideous lack of transparency’
Daniel Schwarcz, an associate law professor at the University of Minnesota Law School who is an expert on home insurance policies, says the Moores’ lawsuit could lead to greater disclosure of exactly what home insurance policies cover.
“There is a hideous lack of transparency about policy coverage, about what companies pay out on and how the process works,” Schwarcz says. “All this information is really hidden from public scrutiny. It’s a real regulatory problem. It’s a problem our courts could fix by forcing insurers to pay claims unless they are really clear to policyholders beforehand about what is covered and what is not.”
The ‘mold rush’
Mold and fungus have been around for centuries and are found everywhere. In the United States, there are more than 100,000 species of fungus. Some species like poria can cause extensive property damage; poria is a soil-inhabiting fungus that has shown up recently in homes in Southern California, Northern California and states along the Gulf Coast.
Other types of fungus can cause health problems ranging from runny noses, coughs and sinusitis to more serious upper respiratory ailments such as asthma and bronchitis. Certain types of mold can produce toxins. The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has found no conclusive evidence that inhalation of these toxins is associated with brain damage, memory loss or a lack of energy – as feared a decade ago during the “killer mold” scare.
Before 2000, the few mold-related claims insurers saw generally were settled for a few thousand dollars. But mold and fungus kicked up a furor a decade ago with multimillion-dollar lawsuits by McMahon and other celebrities, and with headlines like this one from Time magazine — “Beware: Toxic Mold.” In one highly publicized case, a Texas family abandoned their mansion and won a $ 32 million jury award in 2001 against Farmers Insurance. An appeals court later reduced the amount to $ 4 million.
Nationwide, mold-damage payouts soared, more than doubling from $ 1.3 billion in 2001 to nearly $ 3 billion in 2002, according to the Insurance Information Institute. From 1997 to 2002, mold-related claims rose from $ 229 million to $ 589 million in California alone. At the time, traditional home insurance policies did not exclude mold and fungus damage.
Attorneys held mold-damage seminars for homeowners in the early part of this century, says Pete Moraga, a spokesman for the Insurance Information Network of California, a nonprofit group supported by the insurance industry.
“They called it the ‘mold rush,’ ” Moraga says. “ ‘Mold is Gold’ was a name of a seminar showing attorneys how they could make a lot of money on this.”
Mold limits become the norm
After a spike in mold-related lawsuits, many state insurance regulators excluded or limited mold coverage on home insurance policies. Mold contamination is covered under these policies only if it is the result of a covered peril, according to the Insurance Information Institute. A covered peril is a type of risk that an insurance policy covers.
For example, the costs of cleaning up mold caused by water from a burst pipe are covered in most policies because water damage from a burst pipe is a covered peril. But mold caused by water from excessive humidity, condensation or flooding is a maintenance issue for the property owner and is not covered. Every state except Arkansas, New York, North Carolina and Virginia has adopted mold limits for home insurance policies.
“The insurance industry reacted en masse to the Texas verdict and put caps across the board into homeowner’s policies regarding mold,” says Amy Bach, executive director of United Policyholders, a nonprofit advocacy group for insurance consumers. “Then it became a big political issue, and some state legislators intervened when they thought the caps were too low. In some states, you’ll see a $ 5,000 max on mold. Other states have nothing on their books. But the insurance companies almost across the board have limited coverage for mold damage.”
Certain states allow insurers to establish sub-limits — either as a percentage of policy limits or as a fixed dollar amount — for mold cleanup. While some insurance companies prefer to create a total exclusion, others exclude mold but offer an attachment to the policy that makes coverage available at an additional cost.
 |
| Walter and Judy Moore let their neighbors know what they think of their home insurance company with a handmade sign on a hedge in their front yard. The message, spelled out in large white letters, says “SAFECO SUCKS!” |
As a result of states letting insurers exclude mold as a covered peril, the Insurance Information Institute was unable to figure out how much insurers paid out in recent years for mold claims. However, the institute does track losses caused by freezing and water damage, which includes mold-related claims. From 2005 to 2009, those losses increased from 15 percent of all home insurance losses to 24 percent.
When comparing home insurance coverage, Patricia McConahay, a spokeswoman for the California Department of Insurance, says people should carefully read the policies to determine whether mold claims will be paid. If a consumer has a mold claim, McConahay says, he should submit it to his insurer. If the claim is denied, he should contact his state’s insurance department. The department will investigate to determine whether the claim was wrongly denied, McConahay says.
Reversing course
The Moores, the Los Angeles couple, filed a complaint in February 2011 with the California Department of Insurance against Safeco for undue delay and unfair denial of their claim. The complaint alleges that Safeco denied the couple’s claim twice before finally approving it, but only after a long delay that gave the fungus time to spread throughout the house.
“Before I allowed anyone to tear up our home, I double-checked with the claims adjuster, in writing, that the $ 10,000 amount was for only remediation, and the amount for the repair necessary was not part of this $ 10,000,” Judy says. “The adjuster responded in writing that, yes, the $ 10,000 limit only applied to the remediation part of the claim. He also asked me to get new bids for repair.”
The Moores’ lawsuit alleges Safeco then reversed its decision to avoid the increased repair costs resulting from the delay.
Contractors estimate it will cost $ 350,000 to $ 750,000 to fix the Moores’ home, which was valued at $ 950,000 before the fungus invasion, Walter says.
‘A big case for consumers’
The complaint also asks the California insurance commissioner to require Safeco to provide customers with copies of all insurance documents that “fairly and accurately disclose” what losses are covered. The department has informed the Moores that it will wait until the court case is over before taking any further action.
“I think it’s a big case for consumers,” Walter says. “I’m not a class-action lawyer, but I think some consumer lawyer should jump on this and sue them to recover the difference between the protection homeowners are paying for on the one hand and the protection they are actually getting on the other hand.”
Related Posts:
GardenSK8 2.0 Life After Hurricane Irene
January 13th, 2012
We just recently reopened our doors for the first time after being destroyed by Hurricane Irene on August 27th, 2011. The park was flooded with more than 3 feet of water during the hurricane completely destroying our shop and damaging much of the rest. Our insurance did not cover flood damage and we did not qualify for any government assistance, but that didn’t stop us. We are forever grateful to the artists that selflessly gave their time and trade for painting 20000 square feet top to bottom making us a contender for the World’s Largest Indoor Graffiti Collection painted by more than 20 graffiti artists from around the world. There was also silent auction featuring hand painted graffiti art on canvas and skateboards as well as autographed products from top professional skateboarders and their companies. All money raised went back into rebuilding the skatepark and gave us a pulse. Last but not least we would like to thank those of you who sent in donations from around the country and those of you who were here and rolled up your sleeves to help. Without ALL of you we would have never made it. Love, The Bossman & Family
Related Posts:
after a house fire and the insurance company?
December 27th, 2011
Question by ginger m: after a house fire and the insurance company?
my mother- in -laws house burnt down this week and she lost everything including her 13 yr old beloved cat, insurance people came for the contents list, how long does that take before they will give her a check for the amount so she can begin replaceing things she lost???
Best answer:
Answer by mbrcatz17
Well, they can’t give her a check until they get the fire marshall report – thats usually the biggest holdup. It can take a week, or up to a month. It’s beyond your control, completely.
She CAN ask for an advance, if the fire isn’t of suspicious nature.
Sorry for the loss of her cat. There isn’t any coverage for the cat. Or her pictures, etc.
Now, go dig through your photos of holidays you held in her house, so you can help her make up an inventory of stuff she lost. That inventory can take a long, long time to compile. She’ll need help.
What do you think? Answer below!
Related Posts:
After a widely reported earthquake in California, many people call their insurance company to apply for earthq?
December 13th, 2011
Question by : After a widely reported earthquake in California, many people call their insurance company to apply for earthq?
After a widely reported earthquake in California, many people call their insurance company to apply for earthquake insurance. Might this reaction reflect some deviation from rationality? Discuss.
Best answer:
Answer by Flower
To put in a claim?
Give your answer to this question below!
Related Posts:
Tags: After, Apply, California, Call, Company, earthq, Earthquake, insurance, many, People, Reported, their, widely |
No Comments »
What coverages should one carry on a car after it is four years old.?
November 30th, 2011
Question by thejanitorsez: What coverages should one carry on a car after it is four years old.?
2006 ford fusion, fully paid off. Paying more for insurance now than when I bought it. Why don’t insurance companies scale back coverages as the car depreciates, or are they gouging a bit?
Best answer:
Answer by ♥ Uwish ♥
What company are you insured with? I recently heard that Allstate is increasing their premiums by 28% !!
As far as the coverages you should have, that depends on what you need.
State laws require you to at least have minimum limits liability coverage (which pays for any damages or injuries you cause if you are at fault for an accident.)
Comprehensive and Collision covers damages to your own vehicle. So if you can afford to repair or replace your car if you are in an accident, then you may not need these coverages. Most people though cannot afford to do so.
Rental and Towing coverage- Are always optional. If you can afford to pay for a rental car or have your car towed, then maybe opt out these coverages.
Uninsured and Underinsured motorist coverage. These are always a good idea to have. Godforbid you are hurt in an accident, and the liable party either doesnt have insurance or doesnt have enough insurance, these coverages will kick in and cover your extra medical bills and expenses.
////
As far as you paying more now than when you bought the car could also reflect some other changes made to your policy. Have you gotten any tickets since you purchased the car? Did you move? Add another driver?
Talk to your agent to see what can be done to possibly lower your premiums.
Hope this helps
Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!
Incoming search terms:
Related Posts:
After a California Earthquake: Attitude and Behavior Change (University of Chicago Geography Research Papers)
November 17th, 2011
After a California Earthquake: Attitude and Behavior Change (University of Chicago Geography Research Papers)
List Price: $ 27.50
Price: $ 19.95
Related Posts:
Tags: After, Attitude, Behavior, California, Change, Chicago, Earthquake, Geography, papers, research, University |
No Comments »
Car insurance is way to high, will riding/insuring a 50cc or 125cc bike reduce my car insurance after 2 years?
November 17th, 2011
Question by George Carter: Car insurance is way to high, will riding/insuring a 50cc or 125cc bike reduce my car insurance after 2 years?
I am 19 and have passed my car driving licence 2 months ago. The insurance for all the cars I have looked at are way to high. More than £2500.
I am doing my CBT next week, I was wondering if I drive a moped or 125cc for a year or two will this reduce my car insurance, please help as I need to get on the road. Thankyou.
Best answer:
Answer by Me
in ca you don’t need insurance for a moped which means it wouldn’t help you but driving a small insured motorcycle should as long as your record stays clean.
What do you think? Answer below!
Related Posts:
Late effects among pediatric patients followed for nearly 4 decades after transplantation for severe aplastic anemia
August 7th, 2011
This study evaluates late effects among 152 patients followed 1-38 years (median, 21.8 years). Transplantation-preparative regimes were mostly cyclophosphamide with or without antithymocyte globulin. Survival at 30 years for the acquired AA patients is 82%, and for the Fanconi anemia patients it is 58% (P = .01). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that chronic GVHD (P = .02) and Fanconi anemia (P = .03) negatively impacted survival. Two Fanconi patients and 18 acquired AA patients developed a malignancy that was fatal for 4. There was an increased incidence of thyroid function test abnormalities among those who received total body irradiation. Cyclophosphamide recipients demonstrated normal growth, basically normal development, and pregnancies with mostly normal offspring. Quality-of-life …
MedWorm Sponsor Message: Find out how you can get your message posted here and on over 100,000 other medical web pages in just a couple of days, plus support MedWorm at the same time.
Related Posts:
Even after Princess Di’s fatal crash, only two states require all back-seat passengers to buckle up
April 28th, 2011
Many experts believe Princess Diana might be alive today if she’d been wearing a seat belt while riding in the back seat of a Mercedes that crashed in August 1997 in Paris.
Years after that wreck, only two states — Minnesota and Texas — have laws requiring that all back-seat passengers buckle up, including those over age 18. Many other states have laws for riders under age 18, but those don’t apply to adults riding in the back seat of a car.
In 2009, more than 2,000 back-seat passengers died in U.S. traffic crashes because they weren’t wearing seat belts, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. That represents about 9 percent of all traffic deaths involving vehicle passengers that year. More than one-fourth of those passengers were children under age 13.
 |
| Many experts believe Princess Diana would have survived a fatal car crash in 1997 if she had buckled up in the back seat. |
Survey shows lax buckle-up attitude
Despite the overwhelming amount of research that indicates wearing a seat belt in the back seat saves lives, a February 2011 survey punctuates the fact that most Americans still refuse to buckle up in the back. Of course, that lack of attention to safety can lead to tragic consequences — and to a huge hit to drivers’ auto insurance premiums.
LeaseTrader.com, a car leasing marketplace, polled more than 2,000 men and women throughout the country, including states with and without rear-seat restraint laws. Adults questioned in the poll said they rode in the back seat of a vehicle at least 25 times in 2010.
Among passengers in states that don’t have laws mandating that they buckle up in the back seat, men wore their seat belts just 10 percent of the time, according to the LeaseTrader.com survey. For women, it was 16 percent. However, those same people said they buckled up in the front seat about 75 percent of the time.
Passengers in states that require back-seat passengers to buckle up apparently aren’t fazed by those laws. Among back-seat passengers in states that have some form of rear-seat restraint laws (such as California, Minnesota, Texas and Washington), men said they wore a seat belt just 14 percent of the time. The figure was 18 percent for women.
“What’s most disturbing is that in this day and age of always-on news coverage and awareness, there is no excuse why more people aren’t wearing seat belts in all parts of the vehicle,” says Sergio Stiberman, founder and CEO of LeaseTrader.com.
Forgetfulness drives lack of back-seat buckling
So, why don’t back-seat passengers use seat belts? The No. 1 reason: Forgetfulness. That was cited by 63 percent of the people questioned in the LeaseTrader.com poll. Thirteen percent thought it was unnecessary, and 9 percent felt safe without buckling up in the back seat.
Meanwhile, one-fourth of those polled were less likely to wear a seat belt in the back seat of a large vehicle. “They incorrectly assume they’re safer in the back,” Stiberman says.
The survey found three-fourths of rear-seat passengers aren’t reminded by drivers to buckle up. But experts say there’s no excuse for not buckling up, even if your state doesn’t have a seat belt law for back-seat passengers.
“No matter what seat you’re in, the numbers don’t lie. Seat belts can save lives,” Russ Rader, a spokesman for the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
Researchers from the University at Buffalo’s School of Engineering and Applied Sciences simulated head-on crashes in 2009 and found the injuries most likely to be sustained by unbelted passengers in the back seat are severe head and chest trauma caused by being slammed into the seat in front of them.
In a side-impact collision on the driver’s side of a car, the tests showed an unbelted back-seat passenger on the driver’s side likely would suffer a severe or fatal injury, but the belted driver had a reduced risk for the same type of injury.
Not all seat belt laws are created equal
 |
| Only one state, New Hampshire, doesn’t have any laws requiring adult drivers or passengers to buckle up. |
Seat belt laws are divided into two categories: primary and secondary.
• Primary seat belt laws allow a cop to ticket a driver for not wearing a seat belt; no other traffic offense needs to occur for a cop to pull over the driver.
• Under secondary seat belt laws, a cop may issue a ticket for not wearing a seat belt only when another traffic violation has occurred, such as speeding.
Laws vary greatly from state to state, depending on the age of the rider and in what seat he or she is sitting.
According to the Governors Highway Safety Association, 31 states and the District of Columbia have primary seat belt laws that include the back seat. Eighteen other have secondary seat belt laws that cover the back seat but apply only to passengers up to age 18.
New Hampshire has enacted neither a primary nor a secondary seat belt law for adults, although the state does have a primary seat belt law that covers drivers and passengers under age 18.
To find out what kind of seat belt law your state has, visit the websites of the Governors Highway Safety Association or the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
–Gina Roberts-Grey
