Geico Canceling Insurance Because Customers Work In Firearms Industry

page: 2
20
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sek82
Before anyone else jumps to conclusions...
There are always two sides to every story.

It's not impossible that this has something to do with the manner in which he used the vehicle, although his type of business was mentioned, is it?

Let me put it this way: How many people in the firearms industry thus far have claimed their insurance has also been cancelled for similar reasons?


Yes...It would seem that in an industry that is not shy about loudly airing it's grievances, someone amongst the tens of thousands of other employees of the guns industry would have a similair letter.

We are missing data.....
edit on 25-1-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 02:40 PM
link   
From the Op link...



First Bank of America began confiscating the funds of firearms dealers, now GEICO believes it can cancel service for anyone working in the firearms industry.


Someone want to fill me in on Bank Of America "confiscating funds" of "firearms dealers"...

Cuz this seems a wacko claim that would lead to BOA getting indicted and sued for a coule hundred Million.

Unless they are talking about the banks that got busted banking for the Mexican Cartels? Firearms Dealers=Mexican Cartels???

Anyone know what this claim is about?



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 02:52 PM
link   
Well...I read through the "blacked out portion" and googled up the company. I won't provide names but here are the basics..



(They sell)


converts your shotgun to a different gauge or caliber

Keywords: Shotgun Adapters, Chamber Adapters, Revolver Adapters, sub gauge inserts, barrel inserts, gauge inserts, 12 gauge adapter, 45 acp adapter 12 gauge, gun adapters

12 gauge to 9mm Luger shotgun adapter

20 gauge to 410 /45 colt

12 gauge to 45 colt Pathfinder

Etc. etc.



this policy was for a business auto...Do we know if GEICO has always had a policy of not insuring transport vehicles for firearms? Or new policy? Maybe they just realized what this policy holder actually did for a living?

edit on 25-1-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-1-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 02:55 PM
link   
After searching around, it appears this was an issue dealing with the type of policy and what the vehicle was being used for. He was actually violating the terms of his policy.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by OptimusSubprime
 


I thought the Right Wing loved capitalism?

Well...you reap what you sow.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 03:10 PM
link   
Meh....everyone, go read you auto policy. Every personal auto policy excludes coverage if your vehicle is used for business purposes. Of course, you can purchase a commercial auto policy so that you can use your vehicle for business purposes; however, the transport of explosives is specifically excluded. The real story here is that this person's employer is not supplying a company vehicles for the employee to use in the course of business.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 03:18 PM
link   
They are on the other side of the state from me.
Now i am going to have to check out the company.
Sounds interesting with the conversions they have.

As far as Gieco. Tryed them once, years ago they were
expencive as heck. I switched to State Farm and got a much
better deal, have been with them ever since.

Gieco is handy for buying a car out of state and getting coverage
to drive it back home, but thats about it from my experience.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeatherNLace
Meh....everyone, go read you auto policy. Every personal auto policy excludes coverage if your vehicle is used for business purposes. Of course, you can purchase a commercial auto policy so that you can use your vehicle for business purposes; however, the transport of explosives is specifically excluded. The real story here is that this person's employer is not supplying a company vehicles for the employee to use in the course of business.


I googled him up...one man shop...sells a lot online...this was a commercial vehicel policy, he insured the car through his LLC



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


Well he never said to operate the vehicle, there are other forms of transportation which insurance isn't needed for busses, taxis, legs, bicycles, and in some places, scooters.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Toromos
Here's the latest info from snopes.com about the letter:

Snopes


WTH? Right now I am insured by Geico and my car is being used as a paperweight (it's not running) so I don't buy this explanation...cop out...they asked me I told them right now it's in a parking lot being a paperweight it's not running but in FL it must be insured to be on the premises or it'll be towed so they are in essence insuring a NON MOVING VEHICLE and have not cancelled mine!



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 03:50 PM
link   
Regardless, Geico is an insurance company. They all went on my # list when Obamacare passed with the individual mandate. I would not be surprised if insurance companies are involved in the current gun "debate" (which is really not a debate at all but social engineering, IMO)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 03:55 PM
link   
BH is Warren Buffit's crew. They don't need the money, find alternate insurance.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by OptimusSubprime
 


I thought the Right Wing loved capitalism?

Well...you reap what you sow.


What an asinine comment.

Obviously you don't know how capitalism works.

A company provides goods at a price.

Customer either accepts the price or goes somewhere else.

If the company does something the customer doesn't like then the customer goes somewhere else.
Capitalism doesn't force either the company or the customer to purchase a product or support a policy that either party disagrees with respectively(only government does that). Geico can pursue any such policy it deems appropriate for doing business and customers can refuse to do business with Geico in response.
edit on 25-1-2013 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 05:57 PM
link   
If it is true that Geico cancelled his insurance for being in the firearms business. I in fact, hope he is smart enough to figure out what to do next.

Because if it were me; I would immediately hire a lawyer. Why? Well if Geico does not cancel ALL arms manufactures commercial auto policies then that is discrimination.

Raytheon, Hughs, Boeing. All of these companies make military weapons. Are there employees policies being cancelled? Of course not. As such, this (if true) is a clear cut case of selective enforcement and discrimination.

Personally I have about had it with our Government. I hope this place (USA) holds together two more years, by then I will be running my business in locations outside of the USA. I am looking forward to telling my Government to pound salt.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 06:14 PM
link   
Bottom right corner. Mailed the 6th day of December? I say it has noting to do with gun ban. Sandy Hook happened on December 14 a week and one day after this was mailed. I say it has to do with the liability of the cargo not being disclosed to the insurance agent. What you haul does effect your insurance policy. A gas truck will cost more tan a car. And some companies will not even insure a gas truck because of the explosives problems.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 06:59 PM
link   
It is dated the sixth so it is not in conjunction with the ban.

I really wish that person blacked out their information better you can totally see everything.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by GrimReaper86
 


It's not owned by the government. It's called GEICO because in the begining they only offered their services to government employees.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 07:27 PM
link   
To the people claiming to have court over not having 'insurance' and going to court over it, have you requested a jury trial? Pushed for jury nullification?

I mean, if you didn't hurt/damage anyone/anything driving, I'm sure a lot of jurors out there would nullify this. I honestly can't think of anyone believing car insurance is there for our safety. You never get your money back even when you never crash. It really couldn't be that hard to convince the jury, but that's just my thoughts.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 07:29 PM
link   
Also a problem is the physical damage that the person had.



Comprehensive physical damage coverage – pays for damage to your car from theft, vandalism, flood, fire, and other covered perils.


So they want Geico to insure guns from theft but they don't think Geico should have a choice if they want to?



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Abstruse
To the people claiming to have court over not having 'insurance' and going to court over it, have you requested a jury trial? Pushed for jury nullification?

I mean, if you didn't hurt/damage anyone/anything driving, I'm sure a lot of jurors out there would nullify this. I honestly can't think of anyone believing car insurance is there for our safety. You never get your money back even when you never crash. It really couldn't be that hard to convince the jury, but that's just my thoughts.


I count the money I spend on insurance and do my best to make certain that the insurance company does not make a profit. Now if everyone did that..........





new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join