Insurance companies were the last of the hold-outs. For years, they insisted everyone should pay them a lump sum once a year. Then, slowly, there was a cave. First it slipped to every six months, then quarterly. Now almost every company across the nation accepts monthly. What’s the problem for the insurance companies? Well, they estimate the likely total cost of the claims they will have to pay over the next twelve months and divide that amount between all the policy holders as the premium. If the company has done its sums properly and everyone pays once a year, the company always has the cash in the bank to pay out on all the claims. If people pay monthly, they can easily change to another insurer. They can miss one month’s payment when the family budget is under pressure. That means the insurer may not have enough money to pay the claims. So, to encourage all you people with some savings (or some slack on your credit cards), they offer discounts if you agree to pay every six or twelve months. It gives them more security and saves you some money. Paying monthly costs you the most.

That said, paying monthly gives you flexibility. You can use the online search engines to find auto insurance quotes at the lowest price. Then for just one month’s premium, you can be driving. In effect, this becomes a monthly policy. You can keep shopping around for new premium offers from different insurers. If you find a better monthly rate, you can transfer at the end of the month. But if you pay once or twice a year, the insurer will hit you with high cancellation charges to lock you in. Whatever you might save disappears. Worse, if you change the make and model of your vehicle during the longer policy term, it can be too expensive to move the policy to a cheaper company. You end up paying the higher premium until the six or twelve months end. So make a wise decision. Auto insurance is never cheap. Avoid making it too expensive.

This is where the prices of goods and services slowly rise over time. The purchasing power of our weekly or monthly paycheck drops. With some persuasion, our employers reluctantly increase the pay and make up the difference. The result is a steady erosion in the value of the dollar. What was a good sum twenty years ago becomes a pittance today. This represents a subtle threat. Unless you actually think about the adequacy of your insurance coverage, you just drift on paying the instalments. If the worst happens, your dependents then find out there is enough to cover the cost of the funeral and pay the family outgoings only for a month or so.

In a recent survey of financial preparedness, the answers show that about 60% of all adult Americans have coverage representing less than three times their net annual income. In many cases, this amount would not be enough to clear off the outstanding mortgage on the family home let alone provide a lump sum to tide people over until the loss of income can be recovered. But the detail of financial planning is about more than a simple formula. Some industry professionals recommend coverage representing not less than six or seven times the net annual income. But it’s always better to start with the estimated level of debts. We start with the mortgage and any other loans secured on the family home.

Although these amounts should slowly fall during your lifetime, many people actually maintain or increase the amount borrowed. This may be to trade up in the quality of the home or to release some of the housing equity as cash. The first priority should be to ensure that the family’s occupation of the home will not be threatened. Now add in the unsecured debts in overdrafts and on credit and store cards. Then what are the longer term plans to pay for your children’s college education? The number of dependents and their needs change during your life so keeping the amount of coverage the same is always an option. But, in most cases, inflation-proofing is the better choice, particularly if the policy has a cash value. This gives you more personal security later in life.

Life insurance planning is all about monitoring the needs of your dependents and assessing how much will be required to replace your earning power. When you are starting off, always get the maximum number of life insurance quotes. It’s also a good idea to take independent professional advice on the strategies to apply over your lifetime to get the most value out of the policy you buy.

The answer is negotiating a loan modification. This should be easy. You call up the loan company, explain your problems, show how much you can afford, agree to extend the term of the loan, and reduce the monthly instalments. Except you suddenly discover you no longer know who owns the mortgage. All these clever banks and finance companies sliced and diced all the loans into securitized bonds. The debts were all sold on and funding out who the owners are now can a real problem. But let’s assume you are lucky. That the original lender still owns the debt or you can find someone to talk to who works for the new owner. What exactly do you want? There are two options. The first changes the interest rates applied. Many people have been caught out by variable rates that have increased. To survive, you need to replace this balloon rate with a low fixed rate. The second option is hopefully added on to the first. You need to add years to the term of the mortgage. If you repay the same amount over twenty years instead of ten, your instalments are suddenly affordable again. Yes, you will pay slightly more interest over the additional ten years. But this will be a small price to pay to save your home.

At this point you discover that the person listening is not that sympathetic and sees no reason why the owner of the mortgage should now make less profit. Telling this person about family emergencies and health issues cuts no ice. You also discover the much-publicized Home Affordable Modification Program introduced by the Obama Administration is actually not that helpful. So what does work? The answer is either you are persistent or you get a specialist to help you. But be warned. There are a small army of crooks and con artists out there pretending to be home loan modification specialists. Never employ someone to help unless you have proof they offer real services. Always remember one truth. In the end, the lender makes more money if you stay in your home and pay something. If there is a foreclosure, everyone loses.

Why think about it now? Well, let’s take the worst case scenario. Suppose you or one of your family are struck down. Suddenly, you are looking at big bills and worried about the extent of the cover available under the policy. This is not the best time to open negotiations with the insurer. You are emotionally weak. Worse, the reality of large losses will color the reaction of your insurer. The best time for these negotiations is when you are calm and all the losses for the insurer are in the future. This allows everyone to deal with hypotheticals and not get alarmed when big numbers are mentioned. So why do insurers start talking about big numbers? The national statistics show claims for long-term care almost always fall into the range of three to five years. That’s a big bill when you add in all the different services potentially required, whether in your own home or a nursing facility.

So what happens to people without long-term health insurance? The worst happens to those who have built up assets. Instead of providing for their families, they find all their assets sold to cover the apparently endless series of bills. Of course, some families have one or two who can be persuaded to act as carers. They sacrifice their earning capacity to provide home nursing. This, of course, is the worst case, where the losses just keep mounting up as families cope with the emotional and financial costs of the care. Health insurance provides protection for retirement savings and the assets readied for the children to inherit. Long-term policies cannot remove the emotional burden of living with an injured or dying loved one, but it can make the time less financially stressful.

But, when the legislature in any other state suggests applying the lessons learned, the insurance industry begins to spend money through the lobbyists and advertisers. Soon, everyone with even half an ear on the issue of insurance knows the Californian approach has broken the insurance industry. Local insurers teeter on the edge of insolvency, barely able to scrape even a few cents of profit from their underwriting. Were it not for the strong profits earned elsewhere, the Californians would be denied insurance altogether. Put the other way round, the rest of the US is subsidising Californian drivers. Except, of course, this is completely untrue. The insurance companies in the Californian market routinely report profits in excess of 10%. This is the lie that proves the automobile insurance industry at large runs on greed. A mere 10% profit margin is chicken feed and close to insolvency.

So what is the Californian approach? It throws out reliance on the zip code and credit scoring. Instead, insurers must focus on the safety record of the individual driver. That ensures the good drivers pay less and the bad drivers pay a bigger percentage of the losses they cause. In most other states, the good drivers subsidise the bad. To complete the package, the auto insurance companies must disclose the basis on which they calculate the premiums. This empowers the Department of Insurance and prevents insurers from trying to cheat on the rate calculations to recover some of their lost profits.

If the Commissioner finds evidence of overcharging, he can order the company to cut its premiums and refund the amount overcharged. This is the ultimate sanction and, so far, the Californian courts have consistently refused the appeals of the insurers affected. What better way is there to get full consumer protection? None! That’s why the auto insurance industry would prefer you not to know about Proposition 103 and the beneficial effect it has had. History and current events are off the curriculum in other states as politicians take the money from the insurers and look the other way. Only in states where electors get to vote on the issue or can pressure their representatives is there any chance of improvement.