- This topic has 45 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 2 months ago by
CBad.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 1, 2009 at 8:06 PM #15970July 1, 2009 at 8:30 PM #423639
Zeitgeist
ParticipantMaybe worse than being sued is not being able to afford landlord insurance. My agent told me not to rent to people with certain kinds of dog breeds, but said also that most dogs will bite even the small ones, especially when provoked. I think if you continue to allow dogs, they should be kept in back or where no one passing by can attract them. Just my two cents.
July 1, 2009 at 8:30 PM #424218Zeitgeist
ParticipantMaybe worse than being sued is not being able to afford landlord insurance. My agent told me not to rent to people with certain kinds of dog breeds, but said also that most dogs will bite even the small ones, especially when provoked. I think if you continue to allow dogs, they should be kept in back or where no one passing by can attract them. Just my two cents.
July 1, 2009 at 8:30 PM #423869Zeitgeist
ParticipantMaybe worse than being sued is not being able to afford landlord insurance. My agent told me not to rent to people with certain kinds of dog breeds, but said also that most dogs will bite even the small ones, especially when provoked. I think if you continue to allow dogs, they should be kept in back or where no one passing by can attract them. Just my two cents.
July 1, 2009 at 8:30 PM #424149Zeitgeist
ParticipantMaybe worse than being sued is not being able to afford landlord insurance. My agent told me not to rent to people with certain kinds of dog breeds, but said also that most dogs will bite even the small ones, especially when provoked. I think if you continue to allow dogs, they should be kept in back or where no one passing by can attract them. Just my two cents.
July 1, 2009 at 8:30 PM #424380Zeitgeist
ParticipantMaybe worse than being sued is not being able to afford landlord insurance. My agent told me not to rent to people with certain kinds of dog breeds, but said also that most dogs will bite even the small ones, especially when provoked. I think if you continue to allow dogs, they should be kept in back or where no one passing by can attract them. Just my two cents.
July 1, 2009 at 9:43 PM #423674Coronita
ParticipantWelcome to california…Where people make money the old fashion way…Sueing…
I really hope you have a nice big insurance policy with umbrella coverage.Because if you skimped on insurance and bought the lowest liability coverage you could find and you do get sued, I hope your insurance co doesn’t just decide to pay out the liability amount they are responsible for and then tell the plantiff to go after you directly for the remainder amount.
Happened to my parents, which some guy jammed a finger on something and they sued for $1million. Insurance company liability was like $100k, so the insurance company was about ready to cut a check for $100k and tell the plantiff to sue my parents directly for the $900k and tell my parents they are on their own in court. Fortunately upon investigation, the insurance co didn’t even think he should get more than $10k, so they ended up paying for the lawyer to settle out of court for $20k.
This brings me to my next question. When you have nothing to lose, rentals are great things. When one has significant money to lose, do people weigh the benefit of the incremental increase in income from a rental property versus the additional liability risk one is now exposed to? Just curious.
July 1, 2009 at 9:43 PM #424253Coronita
ParticipantWelcome to california…Where people make money the old fashion way…Sueing…
I really hope you have a nice big insurance policy with umbrella coverage.Because if you skimped on insurance and bought the lowest liability coverage you could find and you do get sued, I hope your insurance co doesn’t just decide to pay out the liability amount they are responsible for and then tell the plantiff to go after you directly for the remainder amount.
Happened to my parents, which some guy jammed a finger on something and they sued for $1million. Insurance company liability was like $100k, so the insurance company was about ready to cut a check for $100k and tell the plantiff to sue my parents directly for the $900k and tell my parents they are on their own in court. Fortunately upon investigation, the insurance co didn’t even think he should get more than $10k, so they ended up paying for the lawyer to settle out of court for $20k.
This brings me to my next question. When you have nothing to lose, rentals are great things. When one has significant money to lose, do people weigh the benefit of the incremental increase in income from a rental property versus the additional liability risk one is now exposed to? Just curious.
July 1, 2009 at 9:43 PM #423904Coronita
ParticipantWelcome to california…Where people make money the old fashion way…Sueing…
I really hope you have a nice big insurance policy with umbrella coverage.Because if you skimped on insurance and bought the lowest liability coverage you could find and you do get sued, I hope your insurance co doesn’t just decide to pay out the liability amount they are responsible for and then tell the plantiff to go after you directly for the remainder amount.
Happened to my parents, which some guy jammed a finger on something and they sued for $1million. Insurance company liability was like $100k, so the insurance company was about ready to cut a check for $100k and tell the plantiff to sue my parents directly for the $900k and tell my parents they are on their own in court. Fortunately upon investigation, the insurance co didn’t even think he should get more than $10k, so they ended up paying for the lawyer to settle out of court for $20k.
This brings me to my next question. When you have nothing to lose, rentals are great things. When one has significant money to lose, do people weigh the benefit of the incremental increase in income from a rental property versus the additional liability risk one is now exposed to? Just curious.
July 1, 2009 at 9:43 PM #424184Coronita
ParticipantWelcome to california…Where people make money the old fashion way…Sueing…
I really hope you have a nice big insurance policy with umbrella coverage.Because if you skimped on insurance and bought the lowest liability coverage you could find and you do get sued, I hope your insurance co doesn’t just decide to pay out the liability amount they are responsible for and then tell the plantiff to go after you directly for the remainder amount.
Happened to my parents, which some guy jammed a finger on something and they sued for $1million. Insurance company liability was like $100k, so the insurance company was about ready to cut a check for $100k and tell the plantiff to sue my parents directly for the $900k and tell my parents they are on their own in court. Fortunately upon investigation, the insurance co didn’t even think he should get more than $10k, so they ended up paying for the lawyer to settle out of court for $20k.
This brings me to my next question. When you have nothing to lose, rentals are great things. When one has significant money to lose, do people weigh the benefit of the incremental increase in income from a rental property versus the additional liability risk one is now exposed to? Just curious.
July 1, 2009 at 9:43 PM #424415Coronita
ParticipantWelcome to california…Where people make money the old fashion way…Sueing…
I really hope you have a nice big insurance policy with umbrella coverage.Because if you skimped on insurance and bought the lowest liability coverage you could find and you do get sued, I hope your insurance co doesn’t just decide to pay out the liability amount they are responsible for and then tell the plantiff to go after you directly for the remainder amount.
Happened to my parents, which some guy jammed a finger on something and they sued for $1million. Insurance company liability was like $100k, so the insurance company was about ready to cut a check for $100k and tell the plantiff to sue my parents directly for the $900k and tell my parents they are on their own in court. Fortunately upon investigation, the insurance co didn’t even think he should get more than $10k, so they ended up paying for the lawyer to settle out of court for $20k.
This brings me to my next question. When you have nothing to lose, rentals are great things. When one has significant money to lose, do people weigh the benefit of the incremental increase in income from a rental property versus the additional liability risk one is now exposed to? Just curious.
July 1, 2009 at 9:48 PM #424421Zeitgeist
ParticipantThey put their assets in a trust or some other type of legal protection for just those instances. This sounds like a good question for the attorneys.
July 1, 2009 at 9:48 PM #424258Zeitgeist
ParticipantThey put their assets in a trust or some other type of legal protection for just those instances. This sounds like a good question for the attorneys.
July 1, 2009 at 9:48 PM #424189Zeitgeist
ParticipantThey put their assets in a trust or some other type of legal protection for just those instances. This sounds like a good question for the attorneys.
July 1, 2009 at 9:48 PM #423909Zeitgeist
ParticipantThey put their assets in a trust or some other type of legal protection for just those instances. This sounds like a good question for the attorneys.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.