Joined
·
20 Posts
Take this as a personal opinion-
I did not say that I recommend minimums to clients. I did say however that there are extremes. While it is true that you can never really have enough insurance to protect you against what MIGHT happen, it just all depends on how much money you're going to want to spend "cotton balling" yourself from the rest of the world.
Liability with limits of 100/300/100 are good if you are fairly well off and have assets that could possibly be jeopardized in the event of a law suit. However for normal every day Joe's, like me and what I assume you to be, who do have to worry about the cost of insurance would probably be better off with lower limits. I would feel as if I was doing an injustice to a client if, knowing their financial background, I locked them into a higher rate to protect them against a "just in case".
And for a professional opinion...I do NOT and never have recommended the lowest limits of liability.
I did not say that I recommend minimums to clients. I did say however that there are extremes. While it is true that you can never really have enough insurance to protect you against what MIGHT happen, it just all depends on how much money you're going to want to spend "cotton balling" yourself from the rest of the world.
Liability with limits of 100/300/100 are good if you are fairly well off and have assets that could possibly be jeopardized in the event of a law suit. However for normal every day Joe's, like me and what I assume you to be, who do have to worry about the cost of insurance would probably be better off with lower limits. I would feel as if I was doing an injustice to a client if, knowing their financial background, I locked them into a higher rate to protect them against a "just in case".
And for a professional opinion...I do NOT and never have recommended the lowest limits of liability.