If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
ParaDygm wrote:
> It's not fair, it's discriminatory.... unless you can post a liability > bond with the state you live. Basically, you'd need to set the minimum > liability (usually $25000.00) in Bond Account and prove that you have > the assetts to uphold extended fault liability. Then you dont have > insurance (self insured). At least $35k. California's limits of 15/30/5 are the lowest in the nation. Wealthy individuals and companies can get permission to self-insure without posting a bond. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
John David Galt wrote:
> > wrote: > > 1.Why do I have to pay seperate liability for each car, when all i can > > do is wreck one at a time? Anyone have one good reason other than > > insurance companies making more money? > > a) By law, the insurance covers the car no matter who is driving it. > Even if you told them about everyone who lives with you, you might have > the habit of lending it to a friend or neighbor (which you wouldn't > legally have to tell the company about unless you give him his own key). Then the friend/neighbor would have his own insurance; it would be sensible to NOT allow him to borrow the car otherwise. > [I'm not a lawyer, but I did just pass my insurance agent test.] UNCLEAN! UNCLEAN! -- Cheers, Bev xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox "Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." -- H.L. Mencken |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
John David Galt wrote: > wrote: > > 1.Why do I have to pay seperate liability for each car, when all i can > > do is wreck one at a time? Anyone have one good reason other than > > insurance companies making more money? > > a) By law, the insurance covers the car no matter who is driving it. > Even if you told them about everyone who lives with you, you might have > the habit of lending it to a friend or neighbor (which you wouldn't > legally have to tell the company about unless you give him his own key). I mean besides it being a law the insurance companies dictated. I should have the option of owning my car and deciding only I can drive it so I don't have to pay more insurance. I understand you are an agent and all but even you have to admit it is a crock. > [I'm not a lawyer, but I did just pass my insurance agent test.] > > b) You could very well wreck the first car today, then switch to driving > the second car and wreck it tomorrow. In fact mathematically, someone > who just had a wreck is much more likely than the average person to have > another. That would be no different than me wrecking my only car, getting a new car that same day, and wrecking it. Either way I am not wrecking them at the same time but at different times. > > 2. And why doesn't my insurance go down even though the value of my car > > goes down? > > If it's liability coverage, it shouldn't. For comp & collision, it can, > but you have to request a reduction in the coverage limits. The company > can't read your mind. Sorry, I was talking about full coverage. My house insurance has steadily gone up with the value of my house, yet my full coverage for my car stays the same even though the value of my car goes down. It would actually be cheaper for me to sell my car and buy one exactly like it, or to switch agencies. That way I am paying insurance on a 5 year old car and not a "brand new" 5 year old car. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
On 10 Mar 2005 14:59:20 -0800, "Furious George" >
wrote: > wrote: >> 1.Why do I have to pay seperate liability for each car, when all i >can >> do is wreck one at a time? Anyone have one good reason other than >> insurance companies making more money? > >If you're talking about liability, it doesn't matter whether you wreck >your own car or not. You could with car #1 wreck someone else's car in >the morning and with car #2 wreck someone else's car in the evening. >Another possibility is that you could lend your cars to other people >and they could actually wreck simultaneously. > >> >> 2. And why doesn't my insurance go down even though the value of my >car >> goes down? > >Because you are not insuring your equity in the car. You are assuring >against liability caused by your car. A POS car can generate just as >much liability as a top of the line model. If anything your rates >should go up because your brakes, etc are getting older. Of course, if collision is included, the cost does go down with a lesser valus of the vehicle. I wonder how many (what percentage) of insured drivers don't carry collision/comprehensive? Probably a lot. -- Bill Funk Change "g" to "a" |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 22:26:51 -0800, John David Galt
> wrote: >> 2. And why doesn't my insurance go down even though the value of my car >> goes down? > >If it's liability coverage, it shouldn't. For comp & collision, it can, >but you have to request a reduction in the coverage limits. The company >can't read your mind. The insurance company does know the value decreases, so the cost should go down. (Ours does.) But you're right, they won't decrease the limits without your request. -- Bill Funk Change "g" to "a" |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
> Of course, if collision is included, the cost does go down with a
> lesser valus of the vehicle. > > I wonder how many (what percentage) of insured drivers don't carry > collision/comprehensive? Probably a lot. > Probably more people carry it than SHOULD carry it, in fact. After a car is a couple of years old, you are losing money by paying for collision/comprehensive coverage. (Even if your 2-year-old car is "totalled", you won't get enough from the insurance company to make a significant down payment on a new car, because they pay you wholesale value, which is about 1/2 of retail value, which in turn is about 1/2 of what you probably believe your car is worth, ha ha) But if your car is still financed, you have no choice but to carry collision/comp. -Dave |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 23:24:28 -0600, > (Brent P) wrote: > >>If someone not on my policy without their own >>insurance wrecks my car, the claim will likely be denied anyway the way >>things seem to work. > > Uh, no. YOUR insurance will pay. Given the way things work, they'll find a way to deny it. But again, why should I pay for people without their own auto insurance to drive my car, when they never, ever, will? If people intend to loan their vehicles to people who don't have their own cars, then they could pay extra on THEIR policies to do that. If people without their own cars are renting vehicles, they pay for their own insurance at the rental counter. Simple. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
In article >, John David Galt wrote:
>> (Brent P) wrote: >>> I've always thought this to be ass-backwards as well. We really should >>> insure drivers for liability, not vehicles. > I agree. Although then there would be more disputes after a hit-and-run > when the car can be identified but the driver can't. (Not to mention the > case where it's parked and rolls down a hill -- yes, the last driver is > liable but good luck finding out who he was!) Easy to have that much smaller risk covered on the car, like comprehensive. > Scott en Aztlán wrote: >> If we did it that way, then every licensed driver would be required to >> carry insurance, even if they do not own a car and choose not to >> drive. After all, you might rent or borrow a car at any time. > In some states this is already required. Even where it isn't, you can > buy "non-owner" coverage, & without it most rental car companies won't > rent to you. The thing is, someone with a license who doesn't have a car and doesn't carry his own insurance is going to be paying through the nose when he does get a car. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Toronto insurance sodomy | RichA | Ford Mustang | 18 | February 27th 05 02:21 AM |
Canada Insurance madness! NEVER go online! | RichA | Ford Mustang | 18 | February 17th 05 06:43 PM |
First time insurance charges | kr0 | General | 0 | December 17th 04 02:28 PM |
Auto Insurance Question (foreign driver) | Mike | General | 0 | August 16th 04 06:52 PM |
Insurance company to pay for impound fees of totaled car? | Gunbu | General | 2 | April 29th 04 08:39 PM |