TPD damages Porsche Carrera GT

[Jefe]

http://azstarnet.com/news/local/govt-an ... 45314.html

Fender bender costs city nearly $44K

9 hours ago • By Darren DaRoncoLoading…
A fender bender will cost the city $43,799.

In October 2013, a Tucson Police Department vehicle rear-ended a car at East Golf Links and South Wilmot roads. The car received damage to its right taillight, an exhaust pipe and the bumper.

Unfortunately for the city, the damaged car was a 2004 Porsche Carrera GT valued at $369,000.

The City Council unanimously approved paying for the repairs at Tuesday’s meeting.

So the city lets all their vehicles drive around town without insurance. They would say they are "self-insured" when in reality we pick up the bill out of the General Fund.

Think about how much damage they have to pay for involving their vehicles and their roads. Millions of dollars. Why don't they buy an insurance policy and support the local economy while saving taxpayer money year over year?

This is it:

[Jefe]

Heres another $1,000,000 paid out because they didnt buy insurance

http://www.gilacourier.com/?p=7916

Kozachik took office in 2009. In June 2010, there was a massive water line break (spilling 11 million gallons of water, the size of the Exxon Valdez spill) in the Union Pacific yard that not only damaged Union Pacific property but caused an extensive hazardous materials disaster when the water ”washed out an oil-water separator and repair pit” causing the dumping of “diesel fuel, oil-based lubricants and other contaminants” into the rail yard and into a wash. Did you hear about this before this week? Me neither. Tucson is so environmentally conscious, isn’t it?
The spill was caused by the City of Tucson’s error. Tucson incorrectly told the railroad that it was OK to dig where a 30 inch water main was. Spoiler alert: it wasn’t OK to dig there. The railroad sued for $1.3M, the city just settled for $1.0M.
So, while Kozachik has spent his time railing against the state Legislature, and raising $10,000 in private donations for a City of Tucson gun purchase program, Tucson taxpayers take a hit to the wallet of $1 million bucks for the City of Tucson yet again not paying attention to the basics.
Is the spill Kozachik’s fault? The bungled city actions that he used to complain about are now happening on his watch. Consider this: the $10K raised for the gun “buyback” and Kozachick’s move to the Democratic Party got a whole lot of press this week while the taxpayers lost 1oo times that due to city mismanagment. Again.
Consider this as well: according to the article, Tucson will pay the $1,000,000 settlement to Union Pacific out of its self-insurance fund. You remember the City of Tucson’s self-insurance fund, don’t you? The self insurance fund that they have been raiding and underfunding since 2001. Apparently, City Hall refers to the self-insuarance fund as “the money tree”.
This is on top of roads that have been grossly neglected ($2B worth) and public safety that has been underfunded to the point of assaults at the public library being deprioritized to the point that they have to lock their doors to keep combatants out.

[CalStateTempe]

you know the answer to these questions...

I agree with you.

[Jefe]

http://www.gilacourier.com/?p=2239

A great read from the Daily Star, we’ll have to add “Uninsured Government” coverage to our home, medical, and auto policies if the city does this.

Tucson is preparing to withdraw $25 million from its self-insurance reserve fund to help offset an $80 million shortfall in this year’s budget, despite warnings from its financial advisers that depleting the fund could leave the city with no way to pay a big legal judgment.
I don’t know why there is a shortage of candidates to run for Tucson City Council. Any prospective candidates have Rob O’Dell over at the Arizona Daily Star doing half of the work for them.
The latest reported is that the city is considering taking money from their self insurance fund to deal with a large projected deficit. The proposed $25M they are thinking about taking is apparently only the latest of several trips to the cookie jar as the fund is already at a $17M deficit that has built up since 2001. The deputy city manager said, according to the article, that top city officials didn’t know about the existing deficit because “nobody told them”.
A highlight roundup article from the article would essentially be a reprint of the entire piece. It’s definitely a must read.
The two big takeaways are that the city’s financial advisers are advising against taking the $25M out of the fund. You remember the city’s financial advisers–they’re the ones who advised the city to wait a month or two before selling Rio Nuevo bonds. The other takeaway is that this move, which will put $25M in coffers right now will remove $1.2M per year from future revenues: $500K per year to pay for a surety bond and $685K per year interest from the Treasury bond they’ll sell to get the $25M.
By itself, this may be a swap necessitated by the current financial times but when viewed in light of the Rio Nuevo bond sale where they traded millions for some quick money now you start to see a pattern emerge in the decision making process. Puzzling indeed, Captain.
On top of all this, according to the article, the surety bond is not even an insurance policy–it just guarantees that the city will pay off on a lawsuit. The surety bond company would pay the lawsuit and come after the city for the money which would be another hit to future budgets.
Insurance, so easy even a caveman can do it?

[Jefe]

Might have to change the title of this thread...

[UAEebs86]

That Porsche had it coming.

Signed,
Salty

[Bruins01]

Actually, this shows a rather fundamental misunderstanding of how insurance works. Insuring a gigantic fleet of cars is ALWAYS more expensive than not insuring them and paying out of pocket for damages. After all, the difference between insurance premiums and payouts for damages is where insurance companies get their profits. When you have a fleet of cars of sufficient size, it's better to self-insure and save on that difference. For smaller fleets and for households, that does not make financial sense and it's better to purchase the insurance, as the catastrophic downside risk is far too high.

I am not defending Tucson here, of course, as the city seems to be horribly managed all around.

[Jefe]

Actually, this shows a rather fundamental misunderstanding of how insurance works. Insuring a gigantic fleet of cars is ALWAYS more expensive than not insuring them and paying out of pocket for damages.

What do you base this on?

How many vehicles do you think the city owns and doesn't have insured? 500? 1000?

That 1 incident I posted with Union Pacific would have been a covered loss under E&O coverage. That is 1 claim in a policy year. Our city is forced to pay out on hundreds and hundreds of incidents each year.

After all, the difference between insurance premiums and payouts for damages is where insurance companies get their profits.

Profits come from investments and capital gains. If an insurance company relied upon premium intake and claims paid to make their money, they would all be out of business. Have you ever heard of combined ratio? There are numerous companies that have a ratio over 100 which means they pay out more than they bring in. Which is why rates are adjusted and staff is shuffled around or laid off

Just stop, you obviously have no idea what you're spouting.

When you have a fleet of cars of sufficient size, it's better to self-insure and save on that difference.

Better how? To pull it out of the general fund which is already under funded?

I am not defending Tucson here, of course, as the city seems to be horribly managed all around.

Bravo, for once

[wyo-cat]

That 1 incident I posted with Union Pacific would have been a covered loss under E&O coverage. That is 1 claim in a policy year. Our city is forced to pay out on hundreds and hundreds of incidents each year.

E & O is Errors and Omissions insurance, it wouldn't do anything about the UP situation. BTW, I know of several professionals that have had one claim on their E & O and have been denied coverage come renewal time.

Tucson probably self insures because the claims and payouts would make going through an insurance company super expensive - and knowing how insurance companies are, they would get cancelled at some point or pay through the roof even more.

[Longhorned]

Why is it that every time I sit down for a meeting, somebody hands me a box containing a sandwich, a bag of chips, a piece of fruit, a small bottle of water, and a cookie? Who gave money for that? And did those who voluntarily gave money know that that's how it was spent? Is this the meaning of "making (something) possible"?

[Jefe]

E & O is Errors and Omissions insurance, it wouldn't do anything about the UP situation.

An employee of the city mistakenly told them they could drill that hole which caused a massive leak. If not covered, it would have gone to trial and the insurance company would have settled with UP over such a small amount

BTW, I know of several professionals that have had one claim on their E & O and have been denied coverage come renewal time.

There is always another company that will take them

Tucson probably self insures because the claims and payouts would make going through an insurance company super expensive - and knowing how insurance companies are, they would get cancelled at some point or pay through the roof even more.

All of the passenger vehicles they own could be insured much cheaper than crane trucks/emt vehicles/etc. Why dont they do that? The city has NO liability insurance. General Liability, Vehicle Liability, or Work Comp.

But again, more expensive than buying a policy? We cant find real world #s, only what the paper makes common knowledge. I would bet the city pays out at least $8,000,000 in damages a year. I would not be surprised if its double that. Im gonna try and find some accurate info

They have all sorts of money to buy brand new Harleys/BMWs/Denalis/Prius's. There are 3 Prius' outside the Tanque Verde police station, it appears they are used as daily transportation. Meanwhile, just down the street, the Fire Station they pumped millions into sits idle because they built it so close the County border. The city thought they could force the country residents to get annexed into the city and that backfired beautifully. It has been nicknamed the Fire Dept retirement center.

[Bruins01]

There is always another company that will take them

This is an extremely ignorant statement and indicative of the quality of your posts on this board.

I ignored investment income in my post on purpose, because in that way self-insuring is no different than what an insurance company would be doing. I am really having a hard time believing that you are an adult.

[Salty]

People make mistakes.

I doubt that many private insurance companies would be willing to insurance a police department. Police cars are often subject to dangerous situations that result in vehicle damage.

[ASUHATER!]

People make mistakes.

I doubt that many private insurance companies would be willing to insurance a police department. Police cars are often subject to dangerous situations that result in vehicle damage.

oftentimes which are police officers breaking traffic laws and getting into accidents! the most common people i see not following the rules of the road are police officers. it's been years since i've seen a uapd or tpd officer not roll through a stop sign.

[Salty]

People make mistakes.

I doubt that many private insurance companies would be willing to insurance a police department. Police cars are often subject to dangerous situations that result in vehicle damage.

oftentimes which are police officers breaking traffic laws and getting into accidents! the most common people i see not following the rules of the road are police officers. it's been years since i've seen a uapd or tpd officer not roll through a stop sign.

Well, write them a ticket. I see cops stop for stop signs all the time... It's pretty rare for an officer to have an "at fault" accident, and this typically occurs when a cop is looking at his call computer while driving.

[Bruins01]

Oh look, Salty defends the police again.

[ASUHATER!]

People make mistakes.

I doubt that many private insurance companies would be willing to insurance a police department. Police cars are often subject to dangerous situations that result in vehicle damage.

oftentimes which are police officers breaking traffic laws and getting into accidents! the most common people i see not following the rules of the road are police officers. it's been years since i've seen a uapd or tpd officer not roll through a stop sign.

Well, write them a ticket. I see cops stop for stop signs all the time... It's pretty rare for an officer to have an "at fault" accident, and this typically occurs when a cop is looking at his call computer while driving.

then they should get a distracted driving citation...

and literally every day i see cops going through stop signs, speeding, cutting off cars on the road, not wearing a seatbelt, not giving bicycles room on the road...literally every general traffic violation you can think of you see cops doing every day. they to a T do not think any of the laws they enforce apply to them at all.

[Merkin]

I see many policemen on cell phones (not legal to drive in CA with a cell phone) although they PD have exceptions if it is work related. Also they are looking down at their police computers all the time.

It's no wonder they don't get into more accidents.

[Jefe]

There is always another company that will take them

This is an extremely ignorant statement and indicative of the quality of your posts on this board.

What!?!?!?! Thats how the insurance market works

I ignored investment income in my post on purpose, because in that way self-insuring is no different than what an insurance company would be doing. I am really having a hard time believing that you are an adult.

Ohhhhh ok, sure thing You ignored the single most important profit stream in the entire insurance industry on purpose. Got it

So self insuring, in this case, means taking water from the empty well. Youre ok with that?

Im having a hard time believing you paid attention in economics 101

[Salty]

then they should get a distracted driving citation...

and literally every day i see cops going through stop signs, speeding, cutting off cars on the road, not wearing a seatbelt, not giving bicycles room on the road...literally every general traffic violation you can think of you see cops doing every day. they to a T do not think any of the laws they enforce apply to them at all.

You are the king of exaggeration.

Stop lying.

[Bruins01]

There is always another company that will take them

This is an extremely ignorant statement and indicative of the quality of your posts on this board.

What!?!?!?! Thats how the insurance market works

I ignored investment income in my post on purpose, because in that way self-insuring is no different than what an insurance company would be doing. I am really having a hard time believing that you are an adult.

Ohhhhh ok, sure thing You ignored the single most important profit stream in the entire insurance industry on purpose. Got it

So self insuring, in this case, means taking water from the empty well. Youre ok with that?

Im having a hard time believing you paid attention in economics 101

Oh man... Your posts just get worse and worse, somehow.

Many, many things are impossible to insure. As in, there is no insurance company in existence that will insure them. I have run into such a situation professionally, and it is certainly something that happens often.

Insurance companies do earn investment income on their assets. But in order for an entity to self-insure, it must have sufficient assets to cover losses, and if it has sufficient assets, it can earn investment income on them just like an insurance company can. These things can roughly cancel out, so I did not bother to include them in my explanation. I was hoping this would be obvious even to you, but I inexplicably overestimated you yet again.

[Bruins01]

then they should get a distracted driving citation...

and literally every day i see cops going through stop signs, speeding, cutting off cars on the road, not wearing a seatbelt, not giving bicycles room on the road...literally every general traffic violation you can think of you see cops doing every day. they to a T do not think any of the laws they enforce apply to them at all.

You are the king of exaggeration.

Stop lying.

My friend's dad was killed just a few months ago when he was on his bike, in the bike lane, wearing a helmet, and a cop who was texting at the time drove his car right up into him.

[wyo-cat]

@Jefe
Typically, E&O is for licensed professionals who prepare documents, so if a RLS surveyed the point in the field - then E&O may cover it. I'm thinking since it was in the field, that it would fall under liability. I've been involved with a few SNAFU's in the field and it's best to sort them out rather than make a claim on insurance, because that could lead to losing insurance in the future. E&O and professional liability insurance are great in concept, but if you ever use 'em....good luck getting renewed.

[wyo-cat]

then they should get a distracted driving citation...

and literally every day i see cops going through stop signs, speeding, cutting off cars on the road, not wearing a seatbelt, not giving bicycles room on the road...literally every general traffic violation you can think of you see cops doing every day. they to a T do not think any of the laws they enforce apply to them at all.

You are the king of exaggeration.

Stop lying.

Every Cop is a criminal...

[Salty]

then they should get a distracted driving citation...

and literally every day i see cops going through stop signs, speeding, cutting off cars on the road, not wearing a seatbelt, not giving bicycles room on the road...literally every general traffic violation you can think of you see cops doing every day. they to a T do not think any of the laws they enforce apply to them at all.

You are the king of exaggeration.

Stop lying.

My friend's dad was killed just a few months ago when he was on his bike, in the bike lane, wearing a helmet, and a cop who was texting at the time drove his car right up into him.

I'm sure you're being honest.

[Bruins01]

My friend's dad was killed just a few months ago when he was on his bike, in the bike lane, wearing a helmet, and a cop who was texting at the time drove his car right up into him.

I'm sure you're being honest.

Holy shit, man. Is there anything that could possibly shake you back into reality??

http://www.dailynews.com/general-news/2 ... -to-courts

Article from January says "unknown reasons" but it is pretty well known among us that he was texting.

http://bikinginla.com/tag/milton-olin/

You are fucking unbelievable.

[Bruins01]

I really can't believe Salty just accused me of lying about my friend's dad's death. What a pathetic sycophant.

[Salty]

My friend's dad was killed just a few months ago when he was on his bike, in the bike lane, wearing a helmet, and a cop who was texting at the time drove his car right up into him.

I'm sure you're being honest.

Holy shit, man. Is there anything that could possibly shake you back into reality??

http://www.dailynews.com/general-news/2 ... -to-courts

Article from January says "unknown reasons" but it is pretty well known among us that he was texting.

http://bikinginla.com/tag/milton-olin/

You are fucking unbelievable.

*Get in internet argument

*Fakes story to convey personal connection to argument in order to further point

*Googles incidents to further point

*Acts outraged

Go home, Ruins

[azgreg]

Get him Salty!

[Bruins01]

*Get in internet argument

*Fakes story to convey personal connection to argument in order to further point

*Googles incidents to further point

*Acts outraged

Go home, Ruins

Holy shit. Milton Olin's sons are Chris and Geoff Olin, who have been a friends of mine since I was 15. Chris was my catcher in high school until he graduated, and Geoff took over for him my senior year. Milt was an attorney in the entertainment industry, and my dad worked on multiple projects with him.

Milt and Geoff:



I am beginning to understand why people wanted to ban you from goazcats.

[scumdevils86]

Three worst most ban-worthy trolls from TOS (in no specific order):

Bruins01
Salty
Machina

[Salty]

Three worst most ban-worthy trolls from TOS (in no specific order):

Bruins01
Salty
Machina

Add the twins to that list and you've got a winner.

Then again... You actually WERE banned from TOS.

[Bruins01]

Except I have never done anything ban-worthy, despite it seeming like I've been trying.

[Chicat]

And here's the second thread tonight where I'm laughing out loud at Salty stupidity.

He's just not very good at this... and by "this" I mean having an intelligent conversation.

[Salty]

Except I have never done anything ban-worthy, despite it seeming like I've been trying.

You're an annoying little cellar dweller who lives off of the excitement of being offended on an Internet message board.