While I certainly appreciate the Christ-centered focus of Right to Bear . . . from what I can tell, they are missing one critically important piece of coverage: civil liability coverage. Yes, they offer legal defense coverage for civil cases . . . but their website clearly states: "We are not insurance therefore, we do not offer coverage…
While I certainly appreciate the Christ-centered focus of Right to Bear . . . from what I can tell, they are missing one critically important piece of coverage: civil liability coverage. Yes, they offer legal defense coverage for civil cases . . . but their website clearly states: "We are not insurance therefore, we do not offer coverage for civil liability." (https://protectwithbear.com/pages/ccw-insurance) So the best concealed carry insurance for church security . . . is not insurance? Without civil liability coverage, if you're found guilty in a civil case, you might have avoided the legal fees, but you'll still be paying the judgement out of pocket. If I am wrong about this, I'd be glad to humbly accept the correction. But as far as I can tell, CCW Safe is the best choice, in part because of their inclusion of this coverage.
I directly asked the online RTB rep about Civil Liability coverage. This is their response:
"While we provide unlimited coverage for legal fees associated with both civil and criminal suits, it's important to note that our service does not cover civil damages. This means that if you lose a civil trial, all your legal and court fees will be paid upfront, but any amount awarded to the opposing party that you need to pay would not be covered by us."
That's right. Y'all act like the criminal justice system will treat you fairly and your only concern is civil damages. How is that criminal representation serving you from those civil payment "Insurance" companies?
From the RTB website - chat questions: While our service does provide unlimited coverage for all legal fees for criminal and civil suits, it does not cover civil damages. So, if you were to lose your civil trial, all of your legal and court fees would still be paid upfront. However, any amount awarded to an opposing party that is to be paid by you would not be covered by Right to Bear. We hope this helps!
Thank you Keith. If that is the case, can you please provide the link, and mention how much civil liability coverage they provide? From what I can tell, they only provide civil defense costs, not liability coverage . . . which are two different things. Their website clearly states: "We are not insurance therefore, we do not offer coverage for civil liability." (https://protectwithbear.com/pages/ccw-insurance).
CCW Safe provides up to $1.5M Civil Liability Coverage, depending on the plan (https://ccwsafe.com/plans/).
See my posts above. Don't get hung up on civil. Your more important concern is criminal defense. A couple of organizations offer civil damage coverage at great expense. There is a reason they offer it. It's a safe bet. All of these companies being discussed are all FOR PROFIT, and the civil award aspect is a safe bet for them, and they know that. I know this: RTB is the only God centered company.
OJ was famously convicted in a civil case, but not a criminal case. I agree that if someone has a criminal conviction, the civil judgement might a secondary concern for some . . . but for those with spouses and children, a civil judgement is a major concern, and having coverage for that event is very important to those people. I've mentioned several times now that RtB's website clearly states: "We are not insurance therefore, we do not offer coverage for civil liability." (https://protectwithbear.com/pages/ccw-insurance).
If they do, in fact, provide civil liability coverage, it should be easy for you or Keith to provide a link to that information, and a statement of how much coverage they provide. But it seems like all of the responses so far have either been "it's OK to disagree" or "they provide civil defense coverage" . . . neither of which addresses the issue. If you are now admitting that they don't provide civil liability coverage, then that is a very important piece of information that people should have when making an informed decision. If someone decides that they don't care about that coverage, then fine. But I don't think it's responsible to act like it's so unimportant that it's not work mentioning or considering. To myself, and many others, that coverage is an extremely important thing to consider. I pray that you and Keith will consider making this clear to readers / followers. Thank you.
I can answer for him. Pays for civil representation. That's it. No civil damages are paid. No one ever implied that until someone convoluted the discussion.
I am not shielding Keith. These are not my opinions. I have a lot of knowledge in this arena and was attempting to clarify your concerns, which it appears, is not your intention.
If you have a judgement against you in a self defense incident, your bigger worry is that you likely have been convicted of improper action in self defense. And if you don't have IMMEDIATE, PROACTIVE, EXPERIENCED, and WELL PAID CRIMINAL DEFENSE, all the civil liability pay out is worth nothing. As I noted before, to this point in time, I cannot find a case law where civil damages were awarded when the DEFENDER acted appropriately under the CRIMINAL rules and laws of self defense engagement.
Can you please provide the link and quote from their website. I do not see anything offering it as an add-on. All I see is the quote and link that I provided: "We are not insurance therefore, we do not offer coverage for civil liability." (https://protectwithbear.com/pages/ccw-insurance)
Please see my earlier posts. I think it will answer your question. I am former LEO and have been around this business many years. Too many folks get caught up in the civil award part of it which to my knowledge never happens if your "criminal statute" actions were proper. I would check with my insurance agent to see if there is an exclusion to paying civil damages for such an incident. You might be surprised,
Just to be clear, it seems like the responses to my objection started off as "yes, RtB does cover civil liability", then shifted to "it's OK to disagree, and just be glad that RtB is Christ-focused," . . . and now have changed to admitting that that they don't provide civil liability coverage, but saying to just not worry about civil damages. I agree that if someone has a criminal conviction, the civil judgement might a secondary concern for some . . . but for those with spouses and children, a civil judgement is a major concern, and having coverage for that event is very important to those people. I've mentioned several times now that RtB's website clearly states: "We are not insurance therefore, we do not offer coverage for civil liability." (https://protectwithbear.com/pages/ccw-insurance).
If you are now admitting that they don't provide civil liability coverage, then that is a very important piece of information that people should have when making an informed decision. If someone decides that they don't care about that coverage, then fine. But I don't think it's responsible to act like it's so unimportant that it's not work mentioning or considering. To myself, and many others, that coverage is an extremely important thing to consider. I pray that you and Keith will consider making this clear to readers / followers. Thank you.
CIVIL LIABILITY REPRESENTATION! How much clearer does it have to be stated? That is what RTB provides. RTB is NOT an insurance company, which is a GOOD THING. It is amazing to me that not only on this forum, but elsewhere, armed citizens pass right over the CRIMINAL component of a self defense incident, and focus on losing their assets. If you lose your LIBERTY, that seems like a big loss to me.
I don't think anyone in these comments is underestimating the need for criminal defense coverage. We would rightly reject any plans that didn't include that. But we also see the very important need for civil liability coverage, and are thankful that full-service solutions like CCW Safe exist, which include that as well. The issue isn't with you or RTB stating that they provide civil liability representation . . . but the concern is that the difference between civil defense expense coverage and civil liability judgement coverage was not explained in the article, and the potential importance of civil liability judgement coverage was not presented . . . which could lead many readers / followers who trust you and Keith to take your recommendation without making a properly informed decision that includes valuable information. Even including a note somewhere in the article to the effect of, "While RTB is our recommendation, it is worth noting that their plans do not include coverage for civil liability judgements. If you are interested in that coverage, you might consider the Ultimate Plan from CCW Safe." . . . would be a responsible addition. My desire with these comments isn't to disparage you or your work on this project. My concern is for men and women that have families and that serve on church security teams, and could potentially find themselves in jail AND their families' bankrupt because thought they had the best church security insurance, and didn't realize that it doesn't cover them against civil liability judgements. Please pray about this and inform your readers / followers accordingly. Thank you brother.
I will disregard your remarks about deceptive comments. RTB DOES NOT PAY damages for a civil judgement against a person who defended themself.
RTB will vigorously defend your case even to higher courts on appeal, if necessary. My point is, that your actions in the JUSTIFIED LEGAL DEFENSE of yourself most likely had some defects and YOUR action led to an award of damages. That said, it's likely that you have been convicted of your actions. I messaged you to call me about the RTB rep who gave you erroneous information. I am happy to set the record straight, but if you want to promote your chosen choice of legal defense, have at it.
While I certainly appreciate the Christ-centered focus of Right to Bear . . . from what I can tell, they are missing one critically important piece of coverage: civil liability coverage. Yes, they offer legal defense coverage for civil cases . . . but their website clearly states: "We are not insurance therefore, we do not offer coverage for civil liability." (https://protectwithbear.com/pages/ccw-insurance) So the best concealed carry insurance for church security . . . is not insurance? Without civil liability coverage, if you're found guilty in a civil case, you might have avoided the legal fees, but you'll still be paying the judgement out of pocket. If I am wrong about this, I'd be glad to humbly accept the correction. But as far as I can tell, CCW Safe is the best choice, in part because of their inclusion of this coverage.
I’m not sure where you’re seeing that. It clearly states on their page that they cover civil liability.
I directly asked the online RTB rep about Civil Liability coverage. This is their response:
"While we provide unlimited coverage for legal fees associated with both civil and criminal suits, it's important to note that our service does not cover civil damages. This means that if you lose a civil trial, all your legal and court fees will be paid upfront, but any amount awarded to the opposing party that you need to pay would not be covered by us."
That's right. Y'all act like the criminal justice system will treat you fairly and your only concern is civil damages. How is that criminal representation serving you from those civil payment "Insurance" companies?
From the RTB website - chat questions: While our service does provide unlimited coverage for all legal fees for criminal and civil suits, it does not cover civil damages. So, if you were to lose your civil trial, all of your legal and court fees would still be paid upfront. However, any amount awarded to an opposing party that is to be paid by you would not be covered by Right to Bear. We hope this helps!
Thank you Keith. If that is the case, can you please provide the link, and mention how much civil liability coverage they provide? From what I can tell, they only provide civil defense costs, not liability coverage . . . which are two different things. Their website clearly states: "We are not insurance therefore, we do not offer coverage for civil liability." (https://protectwithbear.com/pages/ccw-insurance).
CCW Safe provides up to $1.5M Civil Liability Coverage, depending on the plan (https://ccwsafe.com/plans/).
John
See my posts above. Don't get hung up on civil. Your more important concern is criminal defense. A couple of organizations offer civil damage coverage at great expense. There is a reason they offer it. It's a safe bet. All of these companies being discussed are all FOR PROFIT, and the civil award aspect is a safe bet for them, and they know that. I know this: RTB is the only God centered company.
OJ was famously convicted in a civil case, but not a criminal case. I agree that if someone has a criminal conviction, the civil judgement might a secondary concern for some . . . but for those with spouses and children, a civil judgement is a major concern, and having coverage for that event is very important to those people. I've mentioned several times now that RtB's website clearly states: "We are not insurance therefore, we do not offer coverage for civil liability." (https://protectwithbear.com/pages/ccw-insurance).
If they do, in fact, provide civil liability coverage, it should be easy for you or Keith to provide a link to that information, and a statement of how much coverage they provide. But it seems like all of the responses so far have either been "it's OK to disagree" or "they provide civil defense coverage" . . . neither of which addresses the issue. If you are now admitting that they don't provide civil liability coverage, then that is a very important piece of information that people should have when making an informed decision. If someone decides that they don't care about that coverage, then fine. But I don't think it's responsible to act like it's so unimportant that it's not work mentioning or considering. To myself, and many others, that coverage is an extremely important thing to consider. I pray that you and Keith will consider making this clear to readers / followers. Thank you.
I can answer for him. Pays for civil representation. That's it. No civil damages are paid. No one ever implied that until someone convoluted the discussion.
How is the ‘cover civil liability’ same as ‘pays for civil representation’?
Well since it doesn't define limits in dollars of civil liability, you can take that as civil representation.
I am not shielding Keith. These are not my opinions. I have a lot of knowledge in this arena and was attempting to clarify your concerns, which it appears, is not your intention.
John
If you have a judgement against you in a self defense incident, your bigger worry is that you likely have been convicted of improper action in self defense. And if you don't have IMMEDIATE, PROACTIVE, EXPERIENCED, and WELL PAID CRIMINAL DEFENSE, all the civil liability pay out is worth nothing. As I noted before, to this point in time, I cannot find a case law where civil damages were awarded when the DEFENDER acted appropriately under the CRIMINAL rules and laws of self defense engagement.
They do have civil liability. It's an add on.
Can you please provide the link and quote from their website. I do not see anything offering it as an add-on. All I see is the quote and link that I provided: "We are not insurance therefore, we do not offer coverage for civil liability." (https://protectwithbear.com/pages/ccw-insurance)
John
Please see my earlier posts. I think it will answer your question. I am former LEO and have been around this business many years. Too many folks get caught up in the civil award part of it which to my knowledge never happens if your "criminal statute" actions were proper. I would check with my insurance agent to see if there is an exclusion to paying civil damages for such an incident. You might be surprised,
Ken
Just to be clear, it seems like the responses to my objection started off as "yes, RtB does cover civil liability", then shifted to "it's OK to disagree, and just be glad that RtB is Christ-focused," . . . and now have changed to admitting that that they don't provide civil liability coverage, but saying to just not worry about civil damages. I agree that if someone has a criminal conviction, the civil judgement might a secondary concern for some . . . but for those with spouses and children, a civil judgement is a major concern, and having coverage for that event is very important to those people. I've mentioned several times now that RtB's website clearly states: "We are not insurance therefore, we do not offer coverage for civil liability." (https://protectwithbear.com/pages/ccw-insurance).
If you are now admitting that they don't provide civil liability coverage, then that is a very important piece of information that people should have when making an informed decision. If someone decides that they don't care about that coverage, then fine. But I don't think it's responsible to act like it's so unimportant that it's not work mentioning or considering. To myself, and many others, that coverage is an extremely important thing to consider. I pray that you and Keith will consider making this clear to readers / followers. Thank you.
CIVIL LIABILITY REPRESENTATION! How much clearer does it have to be stated? That is what RTB provides. RTB is NOT an insurance company, which is a GOOD THING. It is amazing to me that not only on this forum, but elsewhere, armed citizens pass right over the CRIMINAL component of a self defense incident, and focus on losing their assets. If you lose your LIBERTY, that seems like a big loss to me.
Ken,
I don't think anyone in these comments is underestimating the need for criminal defense coverage. We would rightly reject any plans that didn't include that. But we also see the very important need for civil liability coverage, and are thankful that full-service solutions like CCW Safe exist, which include that as well. The issue isn't with you or RTB stating that they provide civil liability representation . . . but the concern is that the difference between civil defense expense coverage and civil liability judgement coverage was not explained in the article, and the potential importance of civil liability judgement coverage was not presented . . . which could lead many readers / followers who trust you and Keith to take your recommendation without making a properly informed decision that includes valuable information. Even including a note somewhere in the article to the effect of, "While RTB is our recommendation, it is worth noting that their plans do not include coverage for civil liability judgements. If you are interested in that coverage, you might consider the Ultimate Plan from CCW Safe." . . . would be a responsible addition. My desire with these comments isn't to disparage you or your work on this project. My concern is for men and women that have families and that serve on church security teams, and could potentially find themselves in jail AND their families' bankrupt because thought they had the best church security insurance, and didn't realize that it doesn't cover them against civil liability judgements. Please pray about this and inform your readers / followers accordingly. Thank you brother.
Mike,
Do you work for a legal defense company?
Mike,
I will disregard your remarks about deceptive comments. RTB DOES NOT PAY damages for a civil judgement against a person who defended themself.
RTB will vigorously defend your case even to higher courts on appeal, if necessary. My point is, that your actions in the JUSTIFIED LEGAL DEFENSE of yourself most likely had some defects and YOUR action led to an award of damages. That said, it's likely that you have been convicted of your actions. I messaged you to call me about the RTB rep who gave you erroneous information. I am happy to set the record straight, but if you want to promote your chosen choice of legal defense, have at it.