In your opinion do I still need full coverage insurance or just liability?
- Thread starter TheHippie
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
jrm
New member
Twilghtzone
Member
>"In your opinion do I still need full coverage insurance or just liability?"
Well, I guess... how much money do you have ?
If you can afford to take a $10,000 write-off and not worry about it,
then get liability insurance.
Otherwise... get full coverage.
Well, I guess... how much money do you have ?
If you can afford to take a $10,000 write-off and not worry about it,
then get liability insurance.
Otherwise... get full coverage.
kingofthehill
New member
I think this saying applies here: "I would rather have it and not need it, then need it and not have it."
Tortilla The Hun
Junior Member
I have full coverage on my rig but it worries me what they will give me for it if I ever wreck it. I would hate to get 1/4th of what I have into it.
Full coverage FTW I had a 2006 IS350 let my sister drive it and she hit a deer. Due to having full coverage and comprehensive coverage as well got paid out 3K spent 500 on damage repairs and was on the road in a week. Like stated previously it’s better to have it and not need it, rather than needing it but not having it.
Uncle Shorty
New member
Stay with the full. Unless you are OK putting ten grand at risk...
Jernik
New member
A lot of variables to consider. Are you in a high theft area? Is vandalism common where you live? Is there a high risk of storm damage (hail, wind, flood)? Is the vehicle parked in a garage, driveway, or on the street? Do you often allow others to drive your vehicle? How much will you save dropping certain coverages? What is your tolerance level for financial risk?
In the past, we have dropped the collision piece but kept liability (required anyway) and uninsured/underinsured coverage. Understanding that by doing so any vandalism, storm damage, etc. or repairs due to my being at fault in an accident would come out of my pocket. In our case, the vehicle was garage kept, never taken to sketchy areas, and driven in areas of light traffic. Thus, risk was relatively low. Savings was not huge IIRC, but enough that I was willing to shoulder the risk given the circumstances.
Think it through, and if you want to drop coverage be sure paying for repairs due to an accident won't put you in a bind financially.
In the past, we have dropped the collision piece but kept liability (required anyway) and uninsured/underinsured coverage. Understanding that by doing so any vandalism, storm damage, etc. or repairs due to my being at fault in an accident would come out of my pocket. In our case, the vehicle was garage kept, never taken to sketchy areas, and driven in areas of light traffic. Thus, risk was relatively low. Savings was not huge IIRC, but enough that I was willing to shoulder the risk given the circumstances.
Think it through, and if you want to drop coverage be sure paying for repairs due to an accident won't put you in a bind financially.
4runner_kid
Senior Member
How much does this truck mean to you? If you can walk away from it tomorrow without payment then don't do full coverage. If you don't have deep pockets and cant afford to replace it when something bad happens then you should probably get full coverage.
Shiftless Joe
Member
You live in the land of the uninsured, what could go wrong?
jordanrb81
New member
I would personally not carry collision.
I fear people throw around "full coverage" because they hear it all the time but don't actually know what it is. There are two broad categories of coverage on a typical personal auto policy. Liability and Physical damage. Liability is what is required by law in I think 47 out of 50 states physical damage is often required by lenders. Liability protects others or the way I look at it protects me from being sued. Physical Damage is "Damage to your automobile" if you're reading your policy. this has two sections Collison and Other Than Collision (comprehensive) Collision is kind of what it sounds like and usually the most expensive part of the entire premium that is damage to your auto if you hit someone and it's your fault OR if someone hits you and it's their fault and he/she has no insurance your insurance company will fix your car, less your deductible, and subrogate against the jerk who hit you without insurance. Comprehensive is for the most part everything else, tree falls on it, flood, theft, vandalism if you hit a deer etc. often Comp coverage can be had without collision and costs not very much at all.
Ok, so now with that out of the way. I personally wouldn't carry comp or collision on a vehicle that is 10 + years old with over 100k on it. I also would look at how much you're paying for comp/collision and divide that into the replacement cost of the vehicle and see what the trade off really is. chances are you'd do better to self insure, save the cash given to the insurance company and keep 10k set to one side incase you wreck your car. I mean I don't know what your financial situation is, which is why I said "if it were me" I am not you, don't know you, so I don't know what I would do if I were you.
I fear people throw around "full coverage" because they hear it all the time but don't actually know what it is. There are two broad categories of coverage on a typical personal auto policy. Liability and Physical damage. Liability is what is required by law in I think 47 out of 50 states physical damage is often required by lenders. Liability protects others or the way I look at it protects me from being sued. Physical Damage is "Damage to your automobile" if you're reading your policy. this has two sections Collison and Other Than Collision (comprehensive) Collision is kind of what it sounds like and usually the most expensive part of the entire premium that is damage to your auto if you hit someone and it's your fault OR if someone hits you and it's their fault and he/she has no insurance your insurance company will fix your car, less your deductible, and subrogate against the jerk who hit you without insurance. Comprehensive is for the most part everything else, tree falls on it, flood, theft, vandalism if you hit a deer etc. often Comp coverage can be had without collision and costs not very much at all.
Ok, so now with that out of the way. I personally wouldn't carry comp or collision on a vehicle that is 10 + years old with over 100k on it. I also would look at how much you're paying for comp/collision and divide that into the replacement cost of the vehicle and see what the trade off really is. chances are you'd do better to self insure, save the cash given to the insurance company and keep 10k set to one side incase you wreck your car. I mean I don't know what your financial situation is, which is why I said "if it were me" I am not you, don't know you, so I don't know what I would do if I were you.
Last edited:
Bumbo
New member
It’s a question only you can answer… and its 100% dependent on your own tolerance for risk and financial position.
Personally, I like having comp and collision “full coverage” … Maybe if I lived in the middle of nowhere I would consider liability only, but I live in LA, and observing other drivers and their habits does not inspire confidence.
Personally, I like having comp and collision “full coverage” … Maybe if I lived in the middle of nowhere I would consider liability only, but I live in LA, and observing other drivers and their habits does not inspire confidence.
AuSeeker
Elite Member
I only have liability...but in my state you're required to carry uninsured motorist to cover yourself from all the lowlifes driving out there without insurance and under insured coverage, so as long as I'm not at fault I'm still covered, so all I have to worry about is an act of God so to speak...a tree or limb falling on mine, a deer, etc. etc.
That being said only the owner of the vehicle can decide what kind of coverage they're comfortable with and the risk if there's one with their choice.
That being said only the owner of the vehicle can decide what kind of coverage they're comfortable with and the risk if there's one with their choice.
Last edited:
RichinRidgewood
New member
Full cover and have a blanket policy.
Because there are so many $280k-$400k Lamborghini, Ferrari etc. in this (stupid expensive) part of New Jersey my insurance dude, who is not like your average insurance pimp, said we had to increase a portion of our insurance because they will go after your house if you crash into one and you're under-insured. So we get to pay extra for rich peoples toys around here.
Because there are so many $280k-$400k Lamborghini, Ferrari etc. in this (stupid expensive) part of New Jersey my insurance dude, who is not like your average insurance pimp, said we had to increase a portion of our insurance because they will go after your house if you crash into one and you're under-insured. So we get to pay extra for rich peoples toys around here.
