"Judah" wrote in message
. ..
Orval Fairbairn wrote in
news
Do you mean to imply that insurance has played no part in the current
state of our nation's "sue first, ask questions later" (or should it be
"settle first, ask questions later") approach to liability
distribution?

A couple of large awards cam do wonders for insurance sales (at any
price)!

Not to mention the $$$$ that lawyers and claimants see in their eyes when
they can sue someone who is backed by an insurance company.

When is the last time you heard of a large cash settlement from an
uninsured
individual?

It's not the actuarie's fault, no. But it doesn't change the fact that the
system is screwed up, and as big a part of the problem as anything else.

If I could do one, and only one, thing to repair the entire system; I would
repeal the doctrine of "strict liability."

I really think that a lot of landlords are simply giving excuses which they
know will be difficult for customers to verify or disprove; it would reduce
the motivation--and that is just a beneficial side effect. The real benefit
would be to stop a tremendous economic drain.

Peter