Accident-prone lawyers

February 23, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

You might expect taxi drivers and pizza delivery people to wreck their cars a lot. But lawyers and judges?

The Web site has ranked the most dangerous drivers by profession, and now you know who’s at the top. Forty-four percent of attorneys who received an insurance comparison quote through the site had made an accident claim in the past.

Right below lawyers and judges are financial professionals, and then government workers, bartenders and waiters.

The safest drivers are athletes and homemakers.

How does this strike you? It seems counterintuitive that lawyers, who spend their careers keeping others out of trouble, are most likely to get in accidents. Many of them are also risk-averse by nature.

Or, are they squeezing in as many billable hours as possible, even on the road?


  • not so counter intuitive really
    Sounds like a case of the common "crackberry" mixed with a little bit of ego and entitlement. Mix it all together and you get a bit of aggressive driving paired with distraction. But then again they can afford whatever insurance increases they incur. Homemakers do not generally have that luxury.
    • I trust Insurance Co reports
      Amazing, one more shot across the bow of their natural adversaries, and you buy it. Ask to see the raw data.
    • seriously
      Well said, and this from a former atty. namaste
    • Think about it
      Just because they've made more claims as a group doesn't mean they caused the accidents. It means they're more educated about the legal process and making claims against others' insurers.
    • what?
      What does filing insurance claims have to do with knowledge of the law? If there is an accident ... the claim is filed with the company or companies insuring the vehicle(s). I believe it is standard practice unless you A, don't have insurance, or B, don't want the claim to go to your insurance company for what ever various reason you might have.
    • Meaningless
      This information is meaningless, as it is only based on people who sought an insurance quote through their website. There is no reason to assume that people who request insurance quotes through insurance-dot-com are representative of the population at large.

    Post a comment to this blog

    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

    2. If you only knew....

    3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

    4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

    5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.