WA Insurance Commissioner Fines USCCA For Selling ‘Unauthorized Insurance’

The impact of a self-defense shooting on someone’s finances can be massive. While it’s important that people act when they need to act, we’d be stupid to pretend the aftermath of a shooting was all kittens and rainbows. In addition to the psychological baggage that someone might carry around after something like that, there’s the potential for legal expenses.

Because of that, many people have started recommending concealed carry insurance. The NRA offered their Carry Guard until very recently, but the program was criticized almost immediately and vilified in every way critics could think of.

Meanwhile, the United States Concealed Carry Association’s similar insurance kind of seemed to fly under the radar. USCCA didn’t have the name recognition of the NRA, which worked to its favor as the media focused on the Second Amendment-Defending behemoth.

Unfortunately, those days appear to be over.

Insurance Commissioner Mike Kreidler has fined United States Concealed Carry Association, Inc., (USCCA) for violating Washington state laws by selling unauthorized insurance that illegally covers defense costs for criminal shootings.

“We made two things very clear to USCCA,” Kreidler said. “Insurers must be authorized to sell in our state, and policies can’t cover illegal activity. These law violations are fixable, if the company wishes to do business in Washington state.”

USCCA agreed to pay a $100,000 fine and $5,457 in unpaid premium taxes, penalties and interest and to continue not selling the insurance in Washington state. Fines assessed by Kreidler are deposited in the state’s general fund to pay for state services.

Additionally, USCCA was illegally acting as an insurer. Insurance companies must be authorized to sell policies in Washington state, and their policies must be reviewed and approved by Kreidler’s office.

USCCA voluntarily stopped selling membership and the protection plan in Washington on Jan. 30, 2019.

The protection plan says it excludes coverage for “criminal acts” and only covers “acts of self-defense.” However, the policies had no mechanism to make sure that payments made to policyholders who were later convicted of a crime were repaid to the insurer.

No, it may not have had a mechanism for being repaid, probably because if people didn’t act in self-defense, they’d be in prison and unable to pay crap back. But let’s be honest, Kreidler wouldn’t have cared anyway.

See, anti-gunners don’t like insurance plans like this because they help ease people’s minds about carrying a firearm. By having coverage, they’re not looking at the possibility of being bankrupted by defending their own life. Even if they win all the legal cases, the attorney fees can still create massive financial hardship, which plans like this are meant to alleviate.

USCCA could have done everything right and they still wouldn’t have gotten authorization. That’s because Kreidler and people like him see self-defense insurance and automatically translate it to their favorite euphemism, “murder insurance.” They have bullied the media and the public to see these insurance plans as just that.

Kreidler could have worked with USCCA to help the company comply with state regulations, but instead he just wants to throw his weight around. Washington has become an anti-gun state and this is the only way he can signal to the constituents that he’s on the right side of the gun debate. He likely wants higher office and has to show he thinks the correct way.

5 Likes

New Jersey is trying the same thing. These anti-gun/anti 2nd Amendment a-holes like to call what USCCA provides to you and I as “murder insurance”.

It’s disgusting.

3 Likes

@dawn - any updates on how this is progressing from your end?

3 Likes

@txradioguy When those types of people have nothing else and FBI Statistics or CDC Center For Disease Control statistics. cannot reinforce the arguments they are advancing for discussion purposes they fall back to degratory rhetoric such as “murder insurance, death insurance, etc.

2 Likes

You’re exactly right. And as was pointed out in the thread on California trying to do the same thing to USCCA… They don’t sell insurance. Their memberships provide education, training, and legal protection if a member is in a physical self-defense incident. Definitely NOT an insurance company.

So it would appear that Kreidler doesn’t have any jurisdiction over USCCA. And he’s betting the people of his state are too lazy and too Liberal to do any research to know what he’s doing is wrong.

4 Likes

Nothing new I can share at this point. As soon as I have anything I can release, you will all know :smiley:

6 Likes

Well you could be right people over the years have gotten lazy. When I was in high school science classes the Christian Brothers and priest, there was no calculators we had to use our slide rule. Most people nowadays probably never heard of a slide rule. Things have changed since the 1960’s and ‘50’s and not always for the better.

2 Likes

Wow!

I don’t know where to begin at in the ignorance of that commissioner’s statement…

"Insurers must be authorized to sell in our state, and policies can’t cover illegal activity."

I mean, “no comment.” The stupidity silences me…

9 Likes

Which is pure BS since many quite legal insurance policies cover a wide variety of illegal acts, such as discrimination, professional malfeasance, fraud, etc.

Policy by virtue signalling which, as usual, only punishes the law abiding public instead of the criminal element.

6 Likes

We live in a time where good is evil and evil is good…

What can I say?

6 Likes

Bottomline: any Democrat Anti-Constitution ran state is against anything that helps Law Abiding Citizens It is not in their Agenda.
Also Everyone wants a peice of the pie; USCCA should not change the policy to be repaid, what if there was a fault in the hearing? That’s why we have appeals etc…
Where is Delta Defense on covering Redflag Laws at this point? Is there a plan that is being executed?

1 Like

@Travis16, we’ve got a discussion going about Red Flag Laws and the USCCA here: Protection against red flag?

Let me know if you need anything else!

3 Likes

Sigh…it’s not insurance…

It’s an affiliation membership in which members receive a variety of benefits like training, discounts and access to legal opinions through it’s network of attorney’s. One of the benefits provided is USCCA paying for an attorney to represent you should you find yourself in a defensive shooting situation (not if you go out and murder someone or rob a bank). This membership is no more insurance than my membership to the YMCA is insurance against me getting fat and they assigning a trainer to me if I have trouble losing weight (one look at me and you’ll see how that didn’t work if it was insurance).

The member benefit specifically excludes eligibility for commissions of crime.

Just shaking my head over here. Go get’em USCCA………

12 Likes

@Dawn … so the part that mystifies me is that we have the insurance commish on record in print to multiple folks (including members on here) declaring they are NOT investigating the USCCA for insurance issues… and now they’ve issued a fine…

… which would lead me to conclude they issue fines to companies they are NOT investigating…
… under insurance rules …
… that they are applying to companies that don’t sell insurance.

O.M.G. these people!! :rage::face_with_symbols_over_mouth:

5 Likes

<shrug @Zee
well, like any bully in a litigious state, sue and fine them first; they can’t afford the costs replying in appeals anyway!

1 Like

Any recommendations on another agency/ association/ company offering similar contracts/ benefits in place og USCCA until such time that you are able to restore service to Washington residents?

1 Like

Wish I had a suggestion for you. NRA Carry Guard is defunct, and FLP doesn’t offer policies in WA. :unamused:

2 Likes

Well; the solution could be easy, but I’m not a lawyer. Instead of selling “insurance”, sell a membership that supports members legal needs.

2 Likes

See that’s the thing… that IS what USCCA does… FLP also… its not insurance, it’s a membership benefit. But the insurance commissioner has unilaterally declared it to be insurance, and then declared it to be illegal.

3 Likes

@Scott76 Back in February of this year, RE Factor Tactical published a blog https://blog.refactortactical.com/blog/concealed-carry-insurance about the Companies who were in the business. Including those who have been isolated from the Washington market. The firms listed where what they considered the best of the choices out there. Perhaps there is new information for you which is still accurate and helpful?

1 Like