Insurance Question

[inscarguy]

Gee...Lets see...I'm a software engineer...who for over 12 years consulted to the Insurance company. I designed and wrote several of the rating systems for the claims divisions used by several very large insurance companies today.



Who said I was. I surely never said it was trade in figures. Every sight I looked at NADA, Kelley Blue Book all were showing RETAIL value. Only ONE site showed any number anywhere CLOSE to $20k....But $12-$14k was the norm.

haha. im not going to get into a p****** contest over this with you. but a "contracted consulting software engineer" is completely different from licensed insurance appraiser and adjuster who actually works and does this for a living for an ins co. i deal with total losses, figures, negotations, mitchell total loss guide, Insurance Auto Auctions every day. i DO know what IS and IS NOT paid.

the nada figures do not lie, but i see you changed them and took off the low mileage addition. the options added were what a majority of the 4runners had on the sports and limiteds. low and high mileage have a huge difference on what anyones vehicle is worth and it showes on the original posters value.

if the original posters vehicle for whatever reason got totalled(god forbid) the insurance would be obligated to pay what the vehicle is worth. the absolute biggest thing a policy holder can do is their homework. they need to find comparable vehicles in their area for accurate pricing. i can only speak for my company on figures. i have experienced ins companies trying to "short change" their own insureds. it happened to me twice and both times i did my homework and eventually got what both cars were worth.

like i said before price shop, this is the best way to get a good rate. lately i have seen ins companies giving a lowball quote to get you in the door and 6 months later increase the dollar amount. if you price shop ask how long the quote is good for and will it be locked in for that time frame. good luck.
it actually costs an ins company more for you to leave than get you in the door. they do not want to have to pay to loose you.

 

[MikeInNH]

haha. im not going to get into a p****** contest over this with you. but a "contracted consulting software engineer" is completely different from licensed insurance appraiser and adjuster who actually works and does this for a living for an ins co. i deal with total losses, figures, negotations, mitchell total loss guide, Insurance Auto Auctions every day. i DO know what IS and IS NOT paid.

And if you work for one of the companies I consulted to..then you use the software I designed.

if the original posters vehicle for whatever reason got totalled(god forbid) the insurance would be obligated to pay what the vehicle is worth. the absolute biggest thing a policy holder can do is their homework. they need to find comparable vehicles in their area for accurate pricing.

And according to the figures I found....that would be between $11K and $15K. $20K is on the high-side...and any adjuster who ALWAYS gives the insurer the HIGH end of the evaluation will find themselves out of a job in very short order.

 

[Druss]

Wow...I'll pay 11 to 16K tomorrow for an 06, Sport with those low miles! I'm trying to find one now and no way am I finding those prices!

I would keep full coverage until lowest value is below 7-8k.

mtnram,
I would sell my 2006 SR5 V6 shadow mica with 77k mi. for $19,000 firm.

 

[jpalaska]

Hey JP

Talk with Keith Silver Allstate in Anchorage.

And yes, you should keep collision. IMO.

Hi AKman,
I talked to Allstate here in Anchorage a few years ago and they said they couldn't match AARP's The Hartford's rates, even though I already have my homeowners insurance with Allstate.
Stay warm, Bro'
JP

 

[teampwr2]

600 bucks isnt much for piece of mind .....I guess im always Blown away when people go spend 25-30 grand on a 4 runner then get all cheap about maint. and Insurance and things like that ....You wanna dance ya gotta pay the fiddler ....just my .02

 

[jpalaska]

600 bucks isnt much for piece of mind .....I guess im always Blown away when people go spend 25-30 grand on a 4 runner then get all cheap about maint. and Insurance and things like that ....You wanna dance ya gotta pay the fiddler ....just my .02

I'm not being cheap at all. I own an '86 911 and a 2006 4Runner, both in pristine condition. I maintain them both meticulously.
My question was for the more actuarial informed, regarding the declining value versus the cost of collision coverage.
If that caused you to be 'blown away', you really didn't need to offer your facile comment.
JP

 

[DC runner]

It isn't an issue of actuarial tables. It is an issue of level of assumed risk. An actuarial table would assume that there is a set X level where you no longer have insurance. Insurance doesn't work that way. You have to decide what level of risk you are willing to operate under.

You seem to hate the idea of comprehensive coverage.. so you know what, f'it. If you think spending 600 dollars to cover 15k or whatever is a waste; then don't pay it. Your only required by law to carry liability to make sure you can cover damage to MY car.

At some point this gets silly. The rule of thumb is this; if your vehicle is worth more than you could easily throw down to replace, then carrying insurance to cover it is a sound bet. This usually means in reality that if your car is 2k or so or below, you don't cover it. A car that everyone agrees is worth well over 12-15k; I think most people would consider it a safe bet to carry insurance on it.

If you want to talk the depreciation, then in 6 years when the truck is down at 3 to 4k; then most people cut comprehensive.


That is all to say... I think we have exhausted rational discussion. Pay, don't pay. All on you.

 

[jimithing]

And if you work for one of the companies I consulted to..then you use the software I designed.



And according to the figures I found....that would be between $11K and $15K. $20K is on the high-side...and any adjuster who ALWAYS gives the insurer the HIGH end of the evaluation will find themselves out of a job in very short order.

Just for comparison my 2007 4Runner with 70k miles was totaled in July 2011 and I got a little over $24k for it from State Farm.

I'm sure payout policy varies from insurance company to insurance company but as the person who got their car totaled my stance was that I needed enough money to buy an replacement. I was prepared to fight them and show them examples of similar cars and their price but luckily it didn't come to that.

To the OP - I say keep it fully insured. It's not worth the risk to me until I feel like the car is almost a throwaway if anything major mechanical happens to it.

 

[Druss]

It isn't an issue of actuarial tables. It is an issue of level of assumed risk. An actuarial table would assume that there is a set X level where you no longer have insurance. Insurance doesn't work that way. You have to decide what level of risk you are willing to operate under.

You seem to hate the idea of comprehensive coverage.. so you know what, f'it. If you think spending 600 dollars to cover 15k or whatever is a waste; then don't pay it. Your only required by law to carry liability to make sure you can cover damage to MY car.

At some point this gets silly. The rule of thumb is this; if your vehicle is worth more than you could easily throw down to replace, then carrying insurance to cover it is a sound bet. This usually means in reality that if your car is 2k or so or below, you don't cover it. A car that everyone agrees is worth well over 12-15k; I think most people would consider it a safe bet to carry insurance on it.

If you want to talk the depreciation, then in 6 years when the truck is down at 3 to 4k; then most people cut comprehensive.


That is all to say... I think we have exhausted rational discussion. Pay, don't pay. All on you.

I had to look up the definition of actuarial. Man I should have continued my education but I agree about what you say.
Quote below:
"The rule of thumb is this; if your vehicle is worth more than you could easily throw down to replace, then carrying insurance to cover it is a sound bet".

Actuarial - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary