4 ms·

> no more paying comprehensive insurance Assuming you can afford to replace it on your own if you need to, this one really adds up.

CameronNemo 4y ago
When I removed comprehensive coverage, the lady from the insurance company audibly said "wow" before telling me my new yearly rate. It dropped quite a bit. Over 50% decrease IIRC.
- batiudrami 4y ago
  In Australia I changed from comprehensive to third party property damage, fire and theft and my rate changed from $950 to $240/y. For a $5000 vehicle! (NB: first and third party medical insurance are covered by rego and Medicare).
tempestn 4y ago
More generally, it usually doesn't make sense to have insurance for anything where you could comfortably afford to pay for the bad thing out of pocket if it happened. For me that means 3rd party liability coverage, yes; comprehensive coverage, no.
ChrisRR 4y ago
As a brit where at least 3rd party insurance is a legal requirement,I consider that everyone should be fully comp. It's not just your car you're damaging, it's likely another car and potentially legal fees and loss of earnings. Even if insurance went optional I'd still go fully comp, as the cost of a new car is not what I need if I'm already financially struggling due to injury
- bin_bash 4y ago
  That’s liability insurance, not comprehensive. In the US you either have to have liability insurance or be very wealthy. Bill Gates has no need for insurance after all.
- pbourke 4y ago
  In the US, auto insurance policies are split into 3 buckets: collision, comprehensive and liability. Comprehensive kicks in for events which are “not collisions,” so tree falling on the car, theft, etc. You are required to have liability and collision coverage in most states, but comprehensive is optional. People often drop it from their policies to save on the premium. I have tried doing that on one of our vehicles over the years but have barely realized any savings so I’ve ended up keeping it on the policy. Seems like others have fared better.
  - rhino369 4y ago
    No state requires collision. If you've got a rust bucket, no reason to cover your own car.
    - pbourke 4y ago
      Oh, good point

CameronNemo 4y ago

When I removed comprehensive coverage, the lady from the insurance company audibly said "wow" before telling me my new yearly rate. It dropped quite a bit. Over 50% decrease IIRC.

batiudrami 4y ago
In Australia I changed from comprehensive to third party property damage, fire and theft and my rate changed from $950 to $240/y. For a $5000 vehicle! (NB: first and third party medical insurance are covered by rego and Medicare).

tempestn 4y ago

More generally, it usually doesn't make sense to have insurance for anything where you could comfortably afford to pay for the bad thing out of pocket if it happened. For me that means 3rd party liability coverage, yes; comprehensive coverage, no.

ChrisRR 4y ago

As a brit where at least 3rd party insurance is a legal requirement,I consider that everyone should be fully comp. It's not just your car you're damaging, it's likely another car and potentially legal fees and loss of earnings. Even if insurance went optional I'd still go fully comp, as the cost of a new car is not what I need if I'm already financially struggling due to injury

bin_bash 4y ago
That’s liability insurance, not comprehensive. In the US you either have to have liability insurance or be very wealthy. Bill Gates has no need for insurance after all.
pbourke 4y ago
In the US, auto insurance policies are split into 3 buckets: collision, comprehensive and liability. Comprehensive kicks in for events which are “not collisions,” so tree falling on the car, theft, etc. You are required to have liability and collision coverage in most states, but comprehensive is optional. People often drop it from their policies to save on the premium. I have tried doing that on one of our vehicles over the years but have barely realized any savings so I’ve ended up keeping it on the policy. Seems like others have fared better.
- rhino369 4y ago
  No state requires collision. If you've got a rust bucket, no reason to cover your own car.
  - pbourke 4y ago
    Oh, good point