Author Topic: Auto Insurance - Min Coverage or Higher?  (Read 1674 times)

Psychstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 873
Auto Insurance - Min Coverage or Higher?
« on: February 23, 2015, 10:25:30 AM »
I was wondering what people in the community think about levels of auto coverage? I am currently re-examining my coverage relative to the min levels required by the state and wanted to see what others in the coomunity do.

State min coverage:

30k per person
60k per accident
25k property damage

My coverage:

100k person
200k accident
50k property


This extra coverage appears to be costing me about $45 annually. Waste of money? Worth the cost?

What is your auto coverage? State minimum or more?

Gone Fishing

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2754
  • So Close went fishing on April 1, 2016
    • Journal
Re: Auto Insurance - Min Coverage or Higher?
« Reply #1 on: February 23, 2015, 12:14:49 PM »
I though my coverage limits might be a little low, so I called my agent to ask about an increase.  Like asking a lion if it is hungry, right?  He said in all his years, he had never had a client sued for being underinsured, all claims were settled within whatever insurance they had in place, and that he personally just had the state minimum.  I like my agent. 

mxt0133

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1559
  • Location: San Francisco
Re: Auto Insurance - Min Coverage or Higher?
« Reply #2 on: February 23, 2015, 01:29:30 PM »
The thing about liability insurance is that the more assets you have the more likely people will go after them if you are found to be liable.

For example someone I know was walking across the street was was hit by someone making a right turn.  He had is lawyer investigate the person that ran him over and found that the guy had minimal insurance was a college student with basically no assets and a minimum wage job.  So the lawyer advised not to to pursue litigation and just settle with the insurance company.  Basically no lawyer would take the case as it is very hard to get a sizable judgement against someone with no assets and garnishing wages is almost impossible to do.  Now if the person that ran you over had a house, significant investments, and a high income job then it would be worth it for someone to go through the litigation process even if they get a fraction of what they are demanding.

So if you have something to loose and $45 in premiums won't break the bank get it to make you sleep at night.  Call it a wealth tax.

I just bumped up my amounts to 300k and 150k and it cost me $30 a year.

Gone Fishing

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2754
  • So Close went fishing on April 1, 2016
    • Journal
Re: Auto Insurance - Min Coverage or Higher?
« Reply #3 on: February 23, 2015, 03:19:22 PM »
Now if the person that ran you over had a house, significant investments, and a high income job then it would be worth it for someone to go through the litigation process even if they get a fraction of what they are demanding.

Yet another benefit of being FIREd, um I mean unemployed, with a small house, and most of your assets in retirement accounts.