Umbrella Insurance

but aren't you already considering it?

Yes. It’s cheap. If you have any appreciable amount of assets you will likely be well served to have it.

I know an individual who had to work well past retirement age because she injured a child with her vehicle. They garnished her wages because she didnt have enough insurance/assets to cover what they got from her. Made her work 10+ years longer than she wanted.

Umbrella coverage is super cheap and it helps you sleep better at night. Also as long as you have limits remaining, the insurance company has a duty to defend you, so their lawyers do all the work. If you are worried enough to start a thread about Umbrella coverage you need umbrella coverage.

Unless you're buying it solely for altruistic purposes, then it's sole purpose is to preserve your wealth/assets. So the question become, do you have sufficient wealth/assets to justify having the policy. With absolutely no personal information given with your question, only you are in a position to make that determination.

What does a $1mm policy typically run, ballpark? The people who have one, who did you go with?

quote:

---

What does a $1mm policy typically run, ballpark? The people who have one, who did you go with?

---

I actually just renewed my policies this week so I know exactly. $292/year for $1MM umbrella with Travelers (up from $277/year). I'm sure there is some discount baked in because I have multiple policies with them but that should give you an idea.

quote:

---

Unless you're buying it solely for altruistic purposes, then it's sole purpose is to preserve your wealth/assets. So the question become, do you have sufficient wealth/assets to justify having the policy. With absolutely no personal information given with your question, only you are in a position to make that determination.

---

Not necessarily. As someone else pointed out, your wages can be garnished after a lawsuit. Unless you’re making $7.50/hr and are already in your 30s or 40s, you’ve got enough future wages to protect that your regular liability on autos or home isn’t going to be sufficient enough for.

I spent five years in the P&C business and it’s difficult to make clients understand this. It’s cheap enough to be a no brainer for many.

True, but from a practical standpoint, that's not a likely scenario. An injured party isn't going to find a lawyer that is willing to pursue a lawsuit to trial in order to get an excess judgment against you in the hopes of getting paid over the course of the next 20 years years, one garnished paycheck at a time. If you don't have substantial assets to seize and sell today, a lawyer's going to settle for insurance policy limits and go about his business. So while it is possible in theory, it is not likely in practice.

quote:

---

An injured party isn't going to find a lawyer that is willing to pursue a lawsuit to trial in order to get an excess judgment against you in the hopes of getting paid over the course of the next 20 years years, one garnished paycheck at a time

---

Let me paint a potential scenario that seems outrageously unlikely but certainly possible.


Neighbor A and Neighbor B don't like each other. At all. Neighbor A has chickens that get out from time to time and roam around. Neighbor B hates when the chickens end up on his property because they shite all over his cement carport. Neighbor A has tried to prevent them from getting out but he's tight and doesn't want to spend the thousands of dollars a fence will cost so he just lets it be since they don't really get out that often anyway. Neighbor B makes multiple requests to Neighbor A to stop it, with text messages that are screenshot. Neighbor B has a pre-existing back injury from a sports accident years ago that he suffers from. Neighbor A is at work one day and the chickens escape again, wandering around and a couple end up on Neighbor B's carport again. Neighbor B's security cameras have the chickens wandering from next door onto his carport. This is a humid, south Louisiana day and the cement is wet from humidity. Chickens shite on the carport and eventually make their way back home after a while. Neighbor B walks to his truck to run some errands, steps in the fresh chicken shite, slips, and falls squarely on his back. Neighbor B is now paralyzed from the existing injury being made worse by the fall.

Neighbor B sees an attorney and shows him the security camera footage of the chickens coming over from next door, provides copies of the multiple text messages requesting a fence be put up to keep the chickens in, and the lawyer decides to send a demand letter to Neighbor A's homeowners insurance carrier. The insurance carrier drags it out in hopes of paying out as little as possible. Meanwhile, before anything is settled, Neighbor B develops a bedsore, it gets infected, and he dies.

Neighbor B's surviving children are distraught over the loss of their father and (whether right or not) want revenge in any way they can get it. They demand that the case now goes to court. A jury is presented with all the evidence and the jury awards a settlement of $1 million. Neighbor A has $150,000 of equity in his home, $600,000 in an IRA, and only $100,000 of liability on his homeowners insurance policy.

Without a $1 million umbrella in force, Neighbor A must now give up all the equity in his home, his entire IRA retirement savings, and after his homeowners insurance carrier pays out what they are liable for, he still has a responsibility of $150,000. Guess what happens -- his future wages are garnished until that $150k is paid.



Of course, this is an outrageously unlikely scenario but one that is certainly possible. Anything can happen and nobody ever believes it will until it does.

quote:

---

homeowner's insurance has a farm animal liability exclusion.

---

Uhh, not all policies.

Still, even if they all did exclude chickens, a cat or dog could still do the same thing.