USCCA and the NRA

[mattiooo]

I'm probably late to the game, but I see that the NRA "uninvited" USCCA from their tradeshow (they had a booth reservation and NRA canceled it), and then a short time later announced they will be unveiling a competing product.

Anyone know the details? Seems like a crappy move to me, but I'm only getting the USCCA side of the story despite being both a USCCA member and an NRA lifetime member.

[Zundfolge]

https://www.nracarryguard.com/

[mattiooo]

Yeah. The USCCA published this comparison chart:
https://d3rmvquxnxa9wt.cloudfront.net/pdf/guides/USCCA_CarryGuard_ComparisonChart.pdf

[Irving]

If Chubb takes care of members for self defense claims like they take care of their insureds on home owner's claims, then sign me up!

Edit, the comparison chart is compelling toward USCCA. However, if I have more than one fire arm self defense issue in a year, then I think I need re-evaluate some life decisions.

[mattiooo]

If Chubb takes care of members for self defense claims like they take care of their insureds on home owner's claims, then sign me up!
Edit, the comparison chart is compelling toward USCCA. However, if I have more than one fire arm self defense issue in a year, then I think I need re-evaluate some life decisions.

If there were a like button - you'd have gotten one.

Several of the things in the comparison are irrelevant, including whether NRA membership is included or when you get your free magazine......but many of them, if accurate, are important.

Again, I'm just looking for balanced info since I'm essentially getting one side of the story.

[funkymonkey1111]

Where's uscca's comparison to the Armed Citizens' Legal Defense Network?

[mattiooo]

Where's uscca's comparison to the Armed Citizens' Legal Defense Network?

I'm sure they put this together in direct response to what has happened. There are at least 6 similar products I'm aware of including, US Law Shield and CCW Safe. I don't think they've built a comparison to every competitor.

I like ACLDN too. I joined them a few years ago first. Especially with Massad Ayoob as part of their organization and legal team. I'm just part of USCCA as an affiliate instructor.

[Great-Kazoo]

Where's uscca's comparison to the Armed Citizens' Legal Defense Network?

https://www.ar-15.co/threads/161050-Insurance

[JohnnyEgo]

If Chubb takes care of members for self defense claims like they take care of their insureds on home owner's claims, then sign me up!

Edit, the comparison chart is compelling toward USCCA. However, if I have more than one fire arm self defense issue in a year, then I think I need re-evaluate some life decisions.

If Chubb is providing the back-end, that would make me feel more comfortable as well. Primarily because they provide other specialty liability products, are no stranger to the business, and the coverage probably follows some ISO derivative so you know exactly how it works. And I have no concerns about their solvency or how to go at their regulator. Without knowing more about the other tailored liability coverage products out there, I'd pick one backed by a major insurer in the specialty liability business over one that wasn't, even if the competitor offered broader claims of coverage or a free hat.

[Fentonite]

If Chubb is providing the back-end, that would make me feel more comfortable as well. Primarily because they provide other specialty liability products, are no stranger to the business, and the coverage probably follows some ISO derivative so you know exactly how it works. And I have no concerns about their solvency or how to go at their regulator. Without knowing more about the other tailored liability coverage products out there, I'd pick one backed by a major insurer in the specialty liability business over one that wasn't, even if the competitor offered broader claims of coverage or a free hat.

I dunno. 80% payout on the back end, and only if a not-guilty verdict, seems like they're not really incentivized to help you win, in fact, just the opposite. The 100% up-front payout from USCCA (with broader coverage) actually feels more like they're in your corner to win it, not just collect a premium. But I'm pissed I never got a free hat.

[JohnnyEgo]

You have me at an advantage because I haven't looked into USCCA or any of the other pop-up players of late. They may be awesome. Or they may just claim to be awesome. With a major insurer, you can look up things like their loss and expense ratios to get a feel for their financial solvency and pay-out rates. You can go to their regulators when you feel that they have or have not acted in good faith. Among other things, I read insurance contracts for a living, and I know exactly how the industry works. I've seen a lot of smaller companies with limited track records offer the moon all the way up until the rubber meets the road. Then three or four big losses later, they are insolvent. Or way out of their depth, or unfamiliar with the courts. Again, none of which is to say that USCCA has these characteristics. I'd hope they were backed by a major player in the liability insurance industry. Absent that, I'd hope they have some sort of publicly available record of payouts and expenditures, as well as the capital to stay in business for the duration, before I decided to depend on their promise to back me in an expensive situation. I'd also ask for a full copy of the policy and read it word-for-word. But that's just me, a tool of the man.

Sorry they didn't give you a free hat! :)

[Fentonite]

Sounds like you know more about the insurance game than I ever will. Do you think there's any merit to my concern about a company's motivation to aggressively defend a client based on the contingencies of win/loss payout, or am I barking up the wrong tree?

[Irving]

Sounds like you know more about the insurance game than I ever will. Do you think there's any merit to my concern about a company's motivation to aggressively defend a client based on the contingencies of win/loss payout, or am I barking up the wrong tree?

An insurance policy is a contract where the insured agrees to pay money to the insurer in exchange for all the things listed in the policy. To not aggressively defend an insured could too easily be turned into a bad faith lawsuit that can have much higher payouts than whatever the policy limits involved in the original lawsuit were. So, pretty much barking up the wrong tree, but totally understandably as the insurance industry is mostly a mystery to the general public who only ever think about insurance when the bill is due or when the media is running some heavily biased horror story.

[Fentonite]

An insurance policy is a contract where the insured agrees to pay money to the insurer in exchange for all the things listed in the policy. To not aggressively defend an insured could too easily be turned into a bad faith lawsuit that can have much higher payouts than whatever the policy limits involved in the original lawsuit were. So, pretty much barking up the wrong tree, but totally understandably as the insurance industry is mostly a mystery to the general public who only ever think about insurance when the bill is due or when the media is running some heavily biased horror story.

Makes sense. I'm still pretty swayed by 100% payment regardless of guilty/not-guilty verdict. You never know what a jury will do, regardless of how "right" you are. I can't see paying more, for protection that only pays in the event you are found blameless. Auto insurance (and others) certainly couldn't get away with that.

[Wulf202]

What about a hung jury?

[Irving]

Makes sense. I'm still pretty swayed by 100% payment regardless of guilty/not-guilty verdict. You never know what a jury will do, regardless of how "right" you are. I can't see paying more, for protection that only pays in the event you are found blameless. Auto insurance (and others) certainly couldn't get away with that.

You'd be surprised by some states comparative negligence laws when it comes to liability insurance, but that's too far off topic for this thread. And it's been so long since I've been in that field that I can't remember specific details.

[Zundfolge]

... if I have more than one fire arm self defense issue in a year, then I think I need re-evaluate some life decisions.

Depends on what they consider "one self defense occurrence" ... so if you get attacked by 3 guys at once is that "one self defense occurrence" or "three self defense occurrences"? What if I get assaulted in a parking lot, shoot the assailant and then while fleeing to a safe space end up engaging one of his buddies? Is that one occurrence or two? If I shoot some gang banger and then a week later his homies are outside my house, is this still part of the first occurrence? Or is it a new one?

I doubt I'll get either of these because while I expect the USCCA comparison between it and the NRA is skewed in their favor, the NRA coverage still genuinely looks like shit compared to it ... and I have problems with how USCCA does their marketing, they come off as kinda scammy. Both seem really over priced to me since the vast majority of CCWers will NEVER use their gun in self defense, thus their payout is going to be real damn low. If I could afford an extra $30 a month I'd have a membership to Whistling Pines. I'd be willing to pay maybe $50-100 a year.

[Irving]

Your first two examples are a single occurrence, while the third would be separate occurrences.