Mr. Senator, my main grievance with mandatory car insurance and also the main reason I am writing you is the FACT that if you DON'T cause an accident or file a claim, at the end of your policy term, you should get some of your money back, preferably to me, in my opinion; 40% or more. (For example, my rough estimate for such an idea is as follows: for new drivers, initially getting your driver's license until probationary period ends: 10,000 miles- no caused accidents or claims. All others: 20,000 miles with no accidents,etc. - up to the age of 40 or 50, then vision and overall health tests will be required periodically pending legal history, etc. If there are still people who want and desire to keep paying for insurance, that is their choice to make. My overall idea is that if you make it through the probationary period with no caused accidents- you hitting someone and NOT vice versa, then paying for insurance should be a choice, not mandatory. Also, you should get back a refund of at least 40 %) To me, personally, mandatory car insurance is legalized extortion- nothing more, nothing less. These multi- billion dollar companies are NOT starving sir, for their next meal, unlike many of their customers who just may
…show more content…
A prominent 3rd party which has stated as such as well is the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America (PCI) in a 2004 article “However, compulsory auto insurance laws do not prevent uninsured drivers from owning or operating a vehicle, and are frequently a harassment to responsible drivers who do maintain
A prominent 3rd party which has stated as such as well is the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America (PCI) in a 2004 article “However, compulsory auto insurance laws do not prevent uninsured drivers from owning or operating a vehicle, and are frequently a harassment to responsible drivers who do maintain