0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
All drivers have to have insurance under existing state law, you rubes. Perhaps it's not the amount the legislature wants for uber drivers, and it is almost certainly less than required by cab services (another discussion on how fair competition is). I can't even imagine the backlash and accusations of racism if kansas tried to enforce mandatory "state minimum insurance ID check".I don't see how the bank should have any say in the matter, and they certainly shouldn't be able to take IC cars as collateral for uber debt. If the driver's borrowed to buy their car, that lien is already on the title.
Quote from: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on April 21, 2015, 12:34:34 PMAll drivers have to have insurance under existing state law, you rubes. Perhaps it's not the amount the legislature wants for uber drivers, and it is almost certainly less than required by cab services (another discussion on how fair competition is). I can't even imagine the backlash and accusations of racism if kansas tried to enforce mandatory "state minimum insurance ID check".I don't see how the bank should have any say in the matter, and they certainly shouldn't be able to take IC cars as collateral for uber debt. If the driver's borrowed to buy their car, that lien is already on the title.The law mandates that the uber drivers carry collision coverage more than just liability that the current state law requires. You'd know that if you actually read the article.
Quote from: MakeItRain on April 21, 2015, 12:49:05 PMQuote from: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on April 21, 2015, 12:34:34 PMAll drivers have to have insurance under existing state law, you rubes. Perhaps it's not the amount the legislature wants for uber drivers, and it is almost certainly less than required by cab services (another discussion on how fair competition is). I can't even imagine the backlash and accusations of racism if kansas tried to enforce mandatory "state minimum insurance ID check".I don't see how the bank should have any say in the matter, and they certainly shouldn't be able to take IC cars as collateral for uber debt. If the driver's borrowed to buy their car, that lien is already on the title.The law mandates that the uber drivers carry collision coverage more than just liability that the current state law requires. You'd know that if you actually read the article.You realize collision only insures the driver's vehicle, right? That's the bankers part of this. Obviously that part of the law is stupid. Good grief.
Quote from: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on April 21, 2015, 01:00:22 PMQuote from: MakeItRain on April 21, 2015, 12:49:05 PMQuote from: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on April 21, 2015, 12:34:34 PMAll drivers have to have insurance under existing state law, you rubes. Perhaps it's not the amount the legislature wants for uber drivers, and it is almost certainly less than required by cab services (another discussion on how fair competition is). I can't even imagine the backlash and accusations of racism if kansas tried to enforce mandatory "state minimum insurance ID check".I don't see how the bank should have any say in the matter, and they certainly shouldn't be able to take IC cars as collateral for uber debt. If the driver's borrowed to buy their car, that lien is already on the title.The law mandates that the uber drivers carry collision coverage more than just liability that the current state law requires. You'd know that if you actually read the article.You realize collision only insures the driver's vehicle, right? That's the bankers part of this. Obviously that part of the law is stupid. Good grief.I'd imagine there is some difference in what the insurance would pay toward the medical bills of the passengers you are driving around as well. I'm not sure, though. All I know about this bill is that it had nearly unanimous support from the house and senate, and now it is vetoed and it will be hilarious if congress can't find the votes to override it.
Now that you're mandated to have medical insurance, it shouldn't matter if you have coverage for your passenger.
Quote from: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on April 21, 2015, 01:00:22 PMQuote from: MakeItRain on April 21, 2015, 12:49:05 PMQuote from: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on April 21, 2015, 12:34:34 PMAll drivers have to have insurance under existing state law, you rubes. Perhaps it's not the amount the legislature wants for uber drivers, and it is almost certainly less than required by cab services (another discussion on how fair competition is). I can't even imagine the backlash and accusations of racism if kansas tried to enforce mandatory "state minimum insurance ID check".I don't see how the bank should have any say in the matter, and they certainly shouldn't be able to take IC cars as collateral for uber debt. If the driver's borrowed to buy their car, that lien is already on the title.The law mandates that the uber drivers carry collision coverage more than just liability that the current state law requires. You'd know that if you actually read the article.You realize collision only insures the driver's vehicle, right? That's the bankers part of this. Obviously that part of the law is stupid. Good grief.I'd imagine there is some difference in what the insurance would pay toward the medical bills of the passengers you are driving around as well. I'm not sure, though.
Quote from: Rage Against the McKee on April 21, 2015, 01:08:55 PMQuote from: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on April 21, 2015, 01:00:22 PMQuote from: MakeItRain on April 21, 2015, 12:49:05 PMQuote from: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on April 21, 2015, 12:34:34 PMAll drivers have to have insurance under existing state law, you rubes. Perhaps it's not the amount the legislature wants for uber drivers, and it is almost certainly less than required by cab services (another discussion on how fair competition is). I can't even imagine the backlash and accusations of racism if kansas tried to enforce mandatory "state minimum insurance ID check".I don't see how the bank should have any say in the matter, and they certainly shouldn't be able to take IC cars as collateral for uber debt. If the driver's borrowed to buy their car, that lien is already on the title.The law mandates that the uber drivers carry collision coverage more than just liability that the current state law requires. You'd know that if you actually read the article.You realize collision only insures the driver's vehicle, right? That's the bankers part of this. Obviously that part of the law is stupid. Good grief.I'd imagine there is some difference in what the insurance would pay toward the medical bills of the passengers you are driving around as well. I'm not sure, though.That's called liability insurance, and it's required by law (I think state minimum is still 25/50/25). How do people not know this crap?
Quote from: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on April 21, 2015, 02:30:45 PMQuote from: Rage Against the McKee on April 21, 2015, 01:08:55 PMQuote from: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on April 21, 2015, 01:00:22 PMQuote from: MakeItRain on April 21, 2015, 12:49:05 PMQuote from: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on April 21, 2015, 12:34:34 PMAll drivers have to have insurance under existing state law, you rubes. Perhaps it's not the amount the legislature wants for uber drivers, and it is almost certainly less than required by cab services (another discussion on how fair competition is). I can't even imagine the backlash and accusations of racism if kansas tried to enforce mandatory "state minimum insurance ID check".I don't see how the bank should have any say in the matter, and they certainly shouldn't be able to take IC cars as collateral for uber debt. If the driver's borrowed to buy their car, that lien is already on the title.The law mandates that the uber drivers carry collision coverage more than just liability that the current state law requires. You'd know that if you actually read the article.You realize collision only insures the driver's vehicle, right? That's the bankers part of this. Obviously that part of the law is stupid. Good grief.I'd imagine there is some difference in what the insurance would pay toward the medical bills of the passengers you are driving around as well. I'm not sure, though.That's called liability insurance, and it's required by law (I think state minimum is still 25/50/25). How do people not know this crap?Personal liability insurance is different than commercial liability insurance for vehicles.
Then stop acting like the state mandate for personal liability insurance is adequate, dumbass.