insurance confusion in Kansas - who's really benefiting?

I've looked into this quite a bit myself recently, and honestly, I think the no-fault system isn't as great as it sounds. Sure, it speeds things up because your insurance pays out quicker without waiting to figure out who's at fault... but it also means your premiums can jump even if you're not responsible for the accident. Personally, I'd rather wait a bit longer for a claim settlement than pay higher rates for something that wasn't my fault.

I get where you're coming from. A few years back, I handled a claim for someone who got rear-ended at a stoplight - clearly not their fault - but because of the no-fault setup, their premiums still took a hit. Felt pretty unfair to me too. Still, I've also seen cases drag out forever in fault-based states, leaving people hanging for months. Guess there's no perfect system...but your frustration makes total sense.

Kansas no-fault mainly affects certain injury-related costs: your own insurer may pay covered medical expenses under personal injury protection, regardless of who caused the crash. It doesn’t mean your insurer automatically handles damage to your car or that your rates must rise after a crash you didn’t cause. Those are separate questions from how injury claims are handled.