Actually, +Gwen Patton
, I suggest you both pack up your snotty 'tude and YOU try again. Your misread of the Miller and Zois page is a little embarrassing. They are discussing how to deal when the driver who hit you
is insured by Progressive, not when you need to use your Progressive policy's UM coverage. Yes, absolutely, if some dude runs a red light and kills you, his insurance
is expected to pay out to the policy limit. This is not the case for your
insurance. If you carry UM insurance, your policy is only required to pay out the difference between awarded damages and what the other guy's insurance has paid out. This is LAW in every state of the Union. Some laws require the UM to pay out at a percentage of negligence, others (MD, frex) only require it if the other driver is 100% at fault. State law, readily available.
Do note that the court just
awarded Miss Fisher's estate damages totaling $760K - it's a matter of public record, which I pointed you to. Miss Fisher's estate was statutorily required
to take the other driver to court to determine fault before Progressive could pay a cent. Also a matter of public record, Valkyryn cited the exact law in the link I provided above. Matt Fisher is throwing a tantrum about something that he doesn't understand, and apparently you don't quite understand it either. Her estate was properly awarded damages just a few days ago, in a case properly tried in MD's courts, and Progressive will be required to pay out the amount over and above what the other party's insurance has already paid, per state law.
Matt Fisher's complaint that his sister's killer was defended by HER insurance company is patently false. He's angry and upset...and wrong.
Clearly neither the judge nor jury found Progressive to be arguing in bad faith. Neither does my boss, an attorney. And I don't work in the mail room, I work directly for him. It's great fun to get all outraged and engaged in an internet pile on, but the law is a touch indifferent to public opinion.