At What age do you switch to liability insurance on a vehicle?

Status
Not open for further replies.
A good rule of thumb is when the annual cost of the collision coverage is > 10% of the value of the vehicle. I'd generally keep comprehensive, at least for the glass coverage. If you rent cars frequently and don't have another car with coverage, I'd consider keeping it too.
 
I never drop comprehensive. Covers things like fire, flood and other things. I've had tenants have tree limbs fall on their cars. Would also be covered under comprehensive. Also I can get no deductible for glass coverage in my state and it's a pain to get glass replaced if you don't have insurance. I usually end up replacing a windshield or glass every 5-10 years.

I suppose collision I could drop at some point, but I've had a few accidents/fender benders where the other party just took off. Basically it boils down to the cost of the insurance vs the value of the car. Just checked my policy and the cost of the coverage is about 3% of the book value of the car so I guess I'll keep it. I suppose if the cost goes to something like 20% or more, then maybe it makes sense to drop it because maybe you can gamble that you can save that amount and not have a claim in 5 years. But it'd take me 30+ years to break even on saving the 3%.
 
I drop collision when its paid off. I will be coming up on 20 years with a drivers license and zero at fault collisions. I hate to think of all that money i've paid into car insurance never to use it one time.
 
My Vehicles a 2005 and 2007 both still carry full coverage. The extra cost of collision and comp per year for both vehicles is less than $300 with a $100 deductible. I would rather spend the few extra $ on insurance and not have to worry about a big unexpected expense of replacing a car. I guess it would be a different story if my premiums were stupid high like it sounds some of you have.
 
Originally Posted by DerbyDave
My Vehicles a 2005 and 2007 both still carry full coverage. The extra cost of collision and comp per year for both vehicles is less than $300 with a $100 deductible. I would rather spend the few extra $ on insurance and not have to worry about a big unexpected expense of replacing a car. I guess it would be a different story if my premiums were stupid high like it sounds some of you have.

What will insurance pay out if you total either car? Would you buy a new car or just one of comparable value?
 
Originally Posted by supton
Originally Posted by DerbyDave
My Vehicles a 2005 and 2007 both still carry full coverage. The extra cost of collision and comp per year for both vehicles is less than $300 with a $100 deductible. I would rather spend the few extra $ on insurance and not have to worry about a big unexpected expense of replacing a car. I guess it would be a different story if my premiums were stupid high like it sounds some of you have.

What will insurance pay out if you total either car? Would you buy a new car or just one of comparable value?


Who knows what they would pay. One is worth about $9000 and the other $3500. Having dealt with several insurance companies in the past on totaled and damaged vehicles I kind of expect anymore to have to fight them no matter who the company is. They all talk a big talk about how they are better than the other company but when it comes time to write a check the tune changes. Whatever the case it would be another used vehicle for cash. I don't finance vehicles.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by DerbyDave
Originally Posted by supton
Originally Posted by DerbyDave
My Vehicles a 2005 and 2007 both still carry full coverage. The extra cost of collision and comp per year for both vehicles is less than $300 with a $100 deductible. I would rather spend the few extra $ on insurance and not have to worry about a big unexpected expense of replacing a car. I guess it would be a different story if my premiums were stupid high like it sounds some of you have.

What will insurance pay out if you total either car? Would you buy a new car or just one of comparable value?


Who knows what they would pay. One is worth about $9000 and the other $3500. Having dealt with several insurance companies in the past on totaled and damaged vehicles I kind of expect anymore to have to fight them no matter who the company is. They all talk a big talk about how they are better than the other company but when it comes time to write a check the tune changes. Whatever the case it would be another used vehicle for cash. I don't finance vehicles.

Fair enough. Some people don't realize that insurance companies pay out what they think the car is worth, and not a new car value. They don't realize that if a vehicle was totaled out, that they'd have to pay for the difference between what they get and what they want for their next vehicle--meaning, they still have to finance and/or pay cash out of pocket so as to get into another vehicle.

In your case, one vehicle is worth $3,500, minus the $100 deductible (and whatever the ins company tries to stiff you). Will $3,400 get you into your next car? I ask because you implied that the payout would purchase your next car. If so, great, it makes sense to me. Me, I'm not sure $3k would be enough to buy my next car, my tastes seem to run too high, so such a plan wouldn't work for me.
 
Originally Posted by bullwinkle
My rule of thumb is value $10K or less, and 7 years old or older (the time when new OEM parts start to get hard to find). I would add, an uninsured motorist section on your car insurance for roughly $10K is a good idea too.


Uninsured motorist -- at least the coverage I had -- only covers injuries caused by uninsured motorists; it does not cover damage to your vehicle caused by an uninsured motorist.

Fun (?) fact -- 15% of US drivers are uninsured. That % is much higher in some states and areas, typically higher in urban areas.

Where I live, in St Louis, 20-22% are uninsured. I would guess that the uninsured fifth of the population is at least twice as likely to get in a wreck as the responsible 80%, so your odds of being hit by an uninsured motorist are really pretty high.
 
Originally Posted by supton
Originally Posted by DerbyDave
Originally Posted by supton
Originally Posted by DerbyDave
My Vehicles a 2005 and 2007 both still carry full coverage. The extra cost of collision and comp per year for both vehicles is less than $300 with a $100 deductible. I would rather spend the few extra $ on insurance and not have to worry about a big unexpected expense of replacing a car. I guess it would be a different story if my premiums were stupid high like it sounds some of you have.

What will insurance pay out if you total either car? Would you buy a new car or just one of comparable value?


Who knows what they would pay. One is worth about $9000 and the other $3500. Having dealt with several insurance companies in the past on totaled and damaged vehicles I kind of expect anymore to have to fight them no matter who the company is. They all talk a big talk about how they are better than the other company but when it comes time to write a check the tune changes. Whatever the case it would be another used vehicle for cash. I don't finance vehicles.

Fair enough. Some people don't realize that insurance companies pay out what they think the car is worth, and not a new car value. They don't realize that if a vehicle was totaled out, that they'd have to pay for the difference between what they get and what they want for their next vehicle--meaning, they still have to finance and/or pay cash out of pocket so as to get into another vehicle.

In your case, one vehicle is worth $3,500, minus the $100 deductible (and whatever the ins company tries to stiff you). Will $3,400 get you into your next car? I ask because you implied that the payout would purchase your next car. If so, great, it makes sense to me. Me, I'm not sure $3k would be enough to buy my next car, my tastes seem to run too high, so such a plan wouldn't work for me.


My general rule is that I won't take a settlement offer that would not buy me the same vehicle, same trim level, in the same condition, with the same mileage at retail not wholesale like they usually offer first. The settlement offer should put you back the way you were at the time of the loss. If I then decided to take that money and add some for an upgrade that is my call.
 
Last edited:
If, in the long run and in the aggregate, it was wise to have insurance, then insurance companies would constantly lose money. They don't.

So I think you should only insure what you can't afford (whatever "afford" means to you) to lose.
 
Originally Posted by supton
Fair enough. Some people don't realize that insurance companies pay out what they think the car is worth, and not a new car value. They don't realize that if a vehicle was totaled out, that they'd have to pay for the difference between what they get and what they want for their next vehicle--meaning, they still have to finance and/or pay cash out of pocket so as to get into another vehicle.

In your case, one vehicle is worth $3,500, minus the $100 deductible (and whatever the ins company tries to stiff you). Will $3,400 get you into your next car? I ask because you implied that the payout would purchase your next car. If so, great, it makes sense to me. Me, I'm not sure $3k would be enough to buy my next car, my tastes seem to run too high, so such a plan wouldn't work for me.


Well it's not what the insurance company thinks, they usually go by book, typically Nadaguide.com. And they pay out retail which is what they expect you will have to pay to get the same car. You can fight them for more if your car has more options than what you could find at retail.

Also having it makes the process a lot smoother. If you don't, you have to chase the other insurance company. Here they just send you a list of places to get the car fixed and you just go there, sign some paperwork and they pay directly.
 
Fair enough, but NADA is still less than new. My point is, many don't keep on top of what their vehicle is actually worth, and would be surprised at what they'd get.

Still not adding it to a 20 year old Camry! NADA says $2k for retail low value, which mine wouldn't even rate at. No idea what collision would cost but after 3 years I'm guessing I'm not too far from being ahead, if I were to wreck it. If someone else hit me and didn't have insurance, I guess I could take them to small claims court, although it probably would be too much hassle.
 
Originally Posted by supton
Fair enough, but NADA is still less than new. My point is, many don't keep on top of what their vehicle is actually worth, and would be surprised at what they'd get.

Still not adding it to a 20 year old Camry! NADA says $2k for retail low value, which mine wouldn't even rate at. No idea what collision would cost but after 3 years I'm guessing I'm not too far from being ahead, if I were to wreck it. If someone else hit me and didn't have insurance, I guess I could take them to small claims court, although it probably would be too much hassle.


Technically you want to make the argument that you would be like to be made whole. Nada retail is supposed to be what they give you and with that money you can get the same car as a replacement, insurance is not winning the lottery and getting a brand new car. If nada retail is too low, you show the insurance company a bunch of ads where the car is comparable to your old one and say that it's too low and they may up the settlement. In those cases, it's kind of a waiting game, if you have time to wait, you can get more as they're also under pressure to settle claims.
 
My MIL got $4000 for a 2005 Saturn VUE FWD/4cylinder motor with 200k and basic used all up after a DUI hit it parked in front of home. She was elastic as vehicle was barely maintained on last legs and paid $6000 for it in 2012 with 40k.

Insurance pays well in that case.
 
I dunno, I made a claim back in '94 or '95. No claims since then. Same for the wife. Not saying I'd go without on a nice vehicle, just that it so far hasn't been needed.
 
Originally Posted by DerbyDave


My general rule is that I won't take a settlement offer that would not buy me the same vehicle, same trim level, in the same condition, with the same mileage at retail not wholesale like they usually offer first. The settlement offer should put you back the way you were at the time of the loss. If I then decided to take that money and add some for an upgrade that is my call.


^ That is what is required by law, and no one should ever accept less than equivalent replacement cost for their vehicle.
 
Waste your money as you see fit. Insurance companies aren't making billions because they are making payouts. Medical is what you will go broke paying. A car is easily fixable or replaceable after a few years. Save some money and quit living with no reserve.
 
If you get into an accident where it is not your fault good luck waiting for the other insurance to pay. If you have collision your company fixes it and goes after the other guy's insurance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top