Of course. In instance where it’s Murder 1, and premeditated, I would not expect USCCA to cover it at all. No issues there. What I’m referring too is Item#2, Subsection B on criminal acts and coverage claims. If someone is charged, is the question. Like I stated, would USCAA have covered Rittenhouse, or would they have quickly bailed siting something like it wasn’t clear cut self-defense. Stating they can drop you if charged leaves them a perpetual easy out to drop coverage. I say that as a Platinum Family subscriber. I just want to make sure I understand the logistics.
I saw the YouTube presentation of that Arizona lawyer and what he said is misleading. Yes, USCCA said that it reserves the rights to terminate membership that is based on bad faith conduct such as fraud. USCCA will recoup any money it paid out in legal defense if a member pleads guilty to any criminal action period. However, USCCA will cover you if you are charged with a crime. However, USCCA, like all other self-defense prepaid legal defense programs review case claims and make determinations on the status of those claims based on facts and not speculation. USCCA is the only organization in the self-defense insurance industry that recoups money it paid out in claims. All other organizations will also immediately stop payments for legal services.
Being charged with a crime as a result of an “occurrence” does not automatically exclude coverage
Sooo… your jumping from post to post spreading false information?
Yes, he does appear to be trying to tarnish the USCCA by posting false statements and attempting to validate them by claiming an Internet lawyer posted it as fact. One reason, I believe, is because these posts show on Internet searches. He is actually committing acts of slander against the USCCA in that regard. The USCCA needs to address these posts; one, by responding; two, possibly filing suit against him.
He’s repeatedly been told his posts are false, but he’s posting the same non-sense everywhere.
Two lawyers have made misleading statements on YouTube for self-serving marketing purposes. Andrew Branca is one of them. He promotes CCW Safe which is a competing self-defense prepaid legal service plan since they sponsor his Law of Self Defense podcast programs on various social media. Branca gets a free CCW Safe membership in addition to renumeration for his advertising and marketing the company. His arguments against USCCA are speculative and not based on the totality of the facts of the case involving Kayla Giles. Arizona defense attorney Marc Victor is another lawyer who made misleading statements about USCCA to market his prepaid legal services plan.
If you understand that, why did you post what you did, and so many times, in so many threads on this forum?
I wanted to ensure that you and other folks understand the motivations of those two attorneys. They are not really making misleading statements out of malice to hurt USCCA. When you said he appears to be trying to tarnish the reputation of USCCA, i thought that you were referring to Mr. Branca. Sometimes, my points bear repeating to get my message across to some folks because some of them still thought that USCCA refuses to cover people charged with crimes after I responded the first time. If people don’t listen or understand what I said the first time, I repeat my statement as many times as necessary until they get it.
There are several folks in this thread attempting to clarify what the policy means. As someone who works in the insurance industry, and who doesn’t want to risk any more than he has to, I’ll ask for an official interpretation by a licensed agent, adjuster, or underwriter who works for USCCA before I’ll make any decisions on whether to change coverage to a different company. What say you, USCCA?
I recommend calling the number on the back of your membership card and asking.
But, they (Delta Defense employees, the ones you get on chat or phone who answer that question will be P&C licensed in your state) will tell you, being charged with a crime as a result of an “occurrence” does not automatically exclude coverage.
BTW, welcome aboard! Another first time poster, amazing how many new folks we are getting lately.
This guy could also tell you
I was going to stay out of this but now I wanna know.
Don’t you have to be charged with a crime in order to be arrested in the first place?
If that is the case, then how could USCCA not cover you since the only way the insurance would kick in, is if you were to be charged. Otherwise, you couldn’t be arrested and/or tried so you wouldn’t need the coverage anyway.
“Don’t you have to be charged with a crime in order to be arrested in the first place?”
No. You can be arrested and jailed without being charged. Being arrested does not mean that you are guilty or not guilty. There is no exact limit on the amount of time you can be held in police custody before being charged. (Comforting, isn’t it?)
As for the rest of it, Giles’ first defense attorney turned over to Delta/USCCA the evidence he’d received from the state in the discovery process. At that point, they stopped paying. Now, I wouldn’t mind knowing what was in that discovery, but ultimately it was enough for the company to deny her claim… and apparently rightfully so with her being convicted.
In a nutshell, you’re covered for “act of self-defense”.
If it is not an “act of self defense” you’re not covered.
Giles is an example of the latter.
72-hours, unless you are being held under the “Patriot” Act, then it is indefinitely.
Depends on the state. What I quoted was Illinois.
But yeah, under that abomination of an “act” you’re right… indefinitely.
“No. You can be arrested and jailed without being charged.”
Bu again, other circumstances not withstanding, you would eventually have to be charged with a crime. Otherwise, USCCA (or Delta Defense)'s services would not be needed because, you wouldn’t be going to jail and could just walk out. No lawyers or defense funds would be needed.