DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 10:36:12 PM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 02/03/2016 09:15 PM, Snuffy "Hub Cap" McKinney wrote:
"philo" wrote in message ...
On 02/03/2016 07:22 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
]


snip

Sounds like no personal banker, lawyer, accountant.



You are correct, I have no personal banker, accountant or financial
advisor. (Did hire a lawyer to do my will though)

I hired a lawyer once. He ripped me off. Now he's RIP himself.



The only other time I hired a lawyer was when I got divorced.
since it was what they say a "friendly" divorce the fee was just $175

I figured it was easier just to agree with her.

A friend of mine spent $5000 on a lawyer and ended up having to give
everything to his ex-wife anyway

Everything except for $5000.

Divorce? Why married then?
I am old fashioned.

DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 10:36:12 PM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 02/03/2016 09:15 PM, Snuffy "Hub Cap" McKinney wrote:
"philo" wrote in message ...
On 02/03/2016 07:22 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
]


snip

Sounds like no personal banker, lawyer, accountan



You are correct, I have no personal banker, accountant or financial
advisor. (Did hire a lawyer to do my will though)

I hired a lawyer once. He ripped me off. Now he's RIP himself.



The only other time I hired a lawyer was when I got divorced.
since it was what they say a "friendly" divorce the fee was just $175

I figured it was easier just to agree with her.

A friend of mine spent $5000 on a lawyer and ended up having to give
everything to his ex-wife anyway

Everything except for $5000.

That is what happens when you get married when you are not ready to
marry someone. There was a guy in my office when I was working.
He divorced 3 times and he said first time is harder but it gets
easier afterward. I now understand why he never owned a house or
any valuable asset.

On 02/03/2016 10:36 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:

X
I figured it was easier just to agree with her.

A friend of mine spent $5000 on a lawyer and ended up having to give
everything to his ex-wife anyway

Everything except for $5000.




Good point!

He invited me over to his apartment after she left


An incredible feat: The place was empty yet at the same time, a complete
mess!

On 02/03/2016 11:38 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:

I figured it was easier just to agree with her.

A friend of mine spent $5000 on a lawyer and ended up having to give
everything to his ex-wife anyway

Everything except for $5000.

Divorce? Why married then?
I am old fashioned.



He was from China and needed to get married so he would not get deported.

He eventually found the right woman and things for him have been great.

A US citizen now and the head of engineering at a major firm

On 02/03/2016 11:43 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
X
A friend of mine spent $5000 on a lawyer and ended up having to give
everything to his ex-wife anyway

Everything except for $5000.

That is what happens when you get married when you are not ready to
marry someone. There was a guy in my office when I was working.
He divorced 3 times and he said first time is harder but it gets
easier afterward. I now understand why he never owned a house or
any valuable asset.


I was divorced by the age of 30 but did not re-marry until I was 60


Plenty of time to think things through and all is right now.


That said, my first wife and I are still good friends.

On 02/03/2016 11:37 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:


I gave her a little help with car repairs etc but she has been damn
independent.



So you must be by now for sure a multi-millionaire?




Hardly.

My initial investment was $200. Had it been even as much as $2000 though
I very well might have been a millionaire now.


A million dollars today does not make one rich.


OTOH: I do have a rich life... my friends

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 11:35:59 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 16:53:21 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 5:56:05 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 11:21:16 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 1:11:48 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 08:26:07 -0600, philo wrote:

Problem is, my home insurer closed operations in my state and I had to
find a different carrier. Most of them...right off the bat...took a look
at the roof and said they would not insure me. It did not matter that
there were no leaks.

I will never do business with State Farm ...ever..because the agent
insulated me as well. I was refused due to "lack of pride of ownership"
or something like that.

I'll be blunt, brief, and to the point.
* INSURANCE PEOPLE ARE ALL ASSHOLES *

I choose not to include my agent or even my Ins Co in your "all".

As I mentioned in my earlier post, my agent called me to tell me that my
Ins Co was going to increase my coverage while reducing my annual rate by
~40%. I've been with my agent for over 30 years. Maybe having a long term
relationship matters.

My agent has always been extremely helpful, especially during the time
when I was asking for multiple quotes as we tried to determine which cars
the girls should take back to college with them. When you factor in age,
driving experience, vehicle year/model and location, matching the
correct driver to the right vehicle can make a huge difference in the cost.

Having an independent agent that is willing to work hard to help determine
the best option and explain the details really beats calling some 8xx
number and talking to a complete stranger. When there was an issue with
an insurance document while I was at the DMV last year, my agent faxed a
corrected document directly to the DMV office and also emailed a copy to my
smartphone just in case there was a problem with the fax. I'd probably
*still* be on the phone with an 8xx rep trying to get it straightened out.


"your best insurance is an insurance broker"

Dealing direct with an insurance company through an agent (like
StateFarm, Geico, Allstate et al) they hold all the cards.
Dealing with a broker - particularly a fairly large broker with a
large "book" of insurance puts some of the cards in YOUR hand. The
broker works for YOU, not the insurance company. An agent works for
the insurance company - not for you.

When you use the title "agent", you need to be more specific. There are
"captive agents" and "independent agents".

According the Investopedia, an independent agent does not work for "the"
insurance company.

"Definition of 'Independent Agent'

AKA an "insurance broker"

An insurance agent that sells insurance policies provided by several different
insurance companies rather than a single insurance company. An independent
agent receives commissions for the policies that he or she sells, and is not
considered an employee of a specific insurance company."

Granted, a "broker" may be even more independent than an independent agent,
and a broker, by law, has a fiduciary duty to the client. However, in some
cases, depending on the relationship between the policy holder and the
independent agent, some courts have ruled that the agent was acting as a
broker and could therefore have a fiduciary duty to the client.

In any case, my agent is an independent and offers insurance products from a
number of carriers. The mere fact that she called me to tell me my rates
were going down by ~40% is enough for me to continue our relationship.

You are dealing with a "broker" - a wise move.

Not necessarily. There are actual 3 types of people that sell insurance:

Captive Agent
Independent Agent
Broker

As noted here (and mentioned in my earlier response) there is a difference
between a Broker and an Independent Agent.

http://gindin-insurance.com/insuranc...ts-difference/

BTW...I have already sent them an email about the typographical errors in
the section entitled:

"Insurance Agents Vs Insurance Brokers: What's the Difference?"

They need to replace the word "agent" with "broker" and change "are" to
"is" in the first sentence of the second paragraph.

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 13:20:56 -0600, philo wrote:

On 02/03/2016 01:00 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 12:50:01 PM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 02/03/2016 11:34 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:


Last November my agent called to tell me that Travelers was going to move
me to their tier system. They increased the amount of coverage for certain
items while reducing my rate by ~40%. The monthly reduction basically covers
the loan payment on the used car we just bought for my oldest daughter.

Sweet!




One reason my car insurance is low is because I have no moving
violations. Got a speeding ticket a few years back and I was so polite
to the small-town policeman he told me to take it to court and "they'd
do something to help me out."

It was a $90 ticket and I said, that would not be necessary, but he
really urged me to take it to court.


Then I realized that for insurance purposes I did not want that on my
record, my rates would probably go up...so I went to court and before I
could say anything, the magistrate asked me if I'd like it changed to a
non-moving violation with the same fine...so my insurance rates would
not go up.

That was easy.

After I got home I pulled the paid ticket out of my pocket to see what
they got me for. Yikes: Vandalizing a street sign! So now I am a
hardened criminal but one not paying much for car insurance at least.

I am really surprised at the "vandalizing" charge.

Based on my experience...err...I mean...from what I've heard, the typical
"reduction" is based on vehicle condition or driver action, not on some
unrelated incident.

I...err...I mean...people I know have been "reduced" to a noisy muffler
(on a brand new rental car), an obstructed license plate (which was covered
with *clear* plexiglas) and "failure to obey a traffic control device" (which,
from what I understand, is the most common reduction since that is actually
what I...err...I mean...the offending driver did).




All they cared about was their money, they just charged me with
something that had the same fine. That was over five years ago and I'm
sure my record's been cleared by now

I got a ticket for rolling through a stop sign in a two-word town,
Grand Prairie, I think, just SW of Dallas. I went to pay it
immediately and the traffic department had a brand new building, all
of it for traffic tickets. When someone from out of state was called,
the court announced with the microphone and speakers that they could
pay $65, or they could pay 80 and not have it reported to the state
the driver came from.