Umbrella Insurance

[phildonnia]

My financial advisor has always recommended that I carry umbrella coverage equal to my net worth. 

Something doesn't seem right about this.  Shouldn't I have coverage equal to the amount of a possible injury claim, regardless of my net worth? 

Suppose Justin Verlander slips on my sidewalk and breaks his arm, costing him $28 million. Is a court going to award him:

1. My net worth, and then the insurance will pay me back
2. The amount of my insurance, but my net worth is protected
3. My net worth, plus my insurance coverage?

If 2 or 3, then what is the point of paying more for higher coverage?

[wageslave23]

I'm pretty sure he would sue for $28 million and your insurance would pay up to the amount of coverage you have and then you would be on the hook for the rest - up to your net worth.  So yes, technically you are correct, your net worth shouldn't matter when determining amount of coverage.  That's my understanding anyway..

[wageslave23]

You probably can't protect against every possible outcome but if you have a $1 million dollar policy, at least you will have the insurance company (and their team of lawyers) on your side trying to protect their million dollars. 

[EricEng]

This is based off my friends lawsuit from severe injuries they suffered from an at fault accident (other drivers fault). The plaintiff usually does not know defendants insurance coverage limit.  The insurance company lawyers will present it to the jury they have no insurance and it is all coming out of the defendants pocket (ignoring fact that insurance company is forking a lot of money for lawyers so obviously they have skin in the game).  So you don't know if you are clearing them out personally or leaving insurance money on the table.

So best suggestion is have more than whatever they might hit you for and keep that number close to the chest.  If you don't have much net worth to protect, then getting cleared out isn't as much of a loss so you could run with little coverage and you can probably reveal that early on to prevent them wasting time on litigation that won't return much.

[stoaX]

Posting to follow.  I also have a $1 million umbrella policy and am interested in hearing the collective wisdom of this forum.

[phildonnia]

You probably can't protect against every possible outcome but if you have a $1 million dollar policy, at least you will have the insurance company (and their team of lawyers) on your side trying to protect their million dollars.

That is one thing I had considered.  The higher your coverage, the more upset your insurance company will be, and the more lawyers they will throw at the problem.  So maybe I should think of it more as legal cost insurance.

[wageslave23]

You probably can't protect against every possible outcome but if you have a $1 million dollar policy, at least you will have the insurance company (and their team of lawyers) on your side trying to protect their million dollars.

That is one thing I had considered.  The higher your coverage, the more upset your insurance company will be, and the more lawyers they will throw at the problem.  So maybe I should think of it more as legal cost insurance.

Also, get quotes from your insurance agent.  A $500,000 policy was about the same as $1 million policy for me.  He said $1 million is the most common.  I think the total cost was about $200/yr and that's extended to 4 houses (3 are rentals).

[ericrugiero]

He said $1 million is the most common.  I think the total cost was about $200/yr and that's extended to 4 houses (3 are rentals).

We also have $1 million umbrella coverage and it was about $200/yr.  I got that about 1-2 years ago.  We were around $200K NW outside of the retirement accounts which are protected. I figured it was time since we were building enough wealth to worry about protecting it. 

My reasoning was that the lawyers being on my side was worth a lot plus it would be a pretty big settlement to go over the $1M. 

[big_owl]

This is why it's beneficial to have a whole bunch of gold.  Ah geez Judge, I just can't afford any more than that (gold hidden in the back 40 somewhere).

[BudgetSlasher]

My financial advisor has always recommended that I carry umbrella coverage equal to my net worth. 

Something doesn't seem right about this.  Shouldn't I have coverage equal to the amount of a possible injury claim, regardless of my net worth? 

Suppose Justin Verlander slips on my sidewalk and breaks his arm, costing him $28 million. Is a court going to award him:

1. My net worth, and then the insurance will pay me back
2. The amount of my insurance, but my net worth is protected
3. My net worth, plus my insurance coverage?

If 2 or 3, then what is the point of paying more for higher coverage?

Neither (in most cases) 2 or 3 is likely to happen.

My understanding is generally, insurance is not discussed in court. In fact, when it is actually the insurance doing the suing they tend to do it using the insured's name.

[Paul der Krake]

This is based off my friends lawsuit from severe injuries they suffered from an at fault accident (other drivers fault). The plaintiff usually does not know defendants insurance coverage limit.  The insurance company lawyers will present it to the jury they have no insurance and it is all coming out of the defendants pocket (ignoring fact that insurance company is forking a lot of money for lawyers so obviously they have skin in the game).  So you don't know if you are clearing them out personally or leaving insurance money on the table.

This run contrary to my understanding of lawsuits. Isn’t coverage one of the first things that get disclosed during discovery?

[obstinate]

I don't know the answer to the legal question, but I can say that we bought the biggest umbrella policy we could reasonably find. Our policy is 10M and it costs about twice as much as the 1M policy would. I am kind of interested in going up to 20M in the future but it's not a pressing concern.

The way a decided the amount was I tried to do some research on the types of losses one is likely to encounter that would be covered. Then I tried to get a sense of the distribution. I wanted to cover, say, 99% of the cases in which my wealth would be significantly depleted. From what I read personal injury judgments for more than 10M are extremely rare.

[cool7hand]

This is based off my friends lawsuit from severe injuries they suffered from an at fault accident (other drivers fault). The plaintiff usually does not know defendants insurance coverage limit.  The insurance company lawyers will present it to the jury they have no insurance and it is all coming out of the defendants pocket (ignoring fact that insurance company is forking a lot of money for lawyers so obviously they have skin in the game).  So you don't know if you are clearing them out personally or leaving insurance money on the table.

This run contrary to my understanding of lawsuits. Isn’t coverage one of the first things that get disclosed during discovery?

I'm afraid that the above is mistaken. I'm not aware of any jurisdiction that does not require timely disclosure of all insurance policies during initial paper discovery. In addition, I'm also not aware of any jurisdiction that permits disclosure to the jury of the presence of insurance. Moreover, your net worth is generally not admissible, except in some limited circumstances such as malicious acts that open the door for punitive damages.

In addition, most tax advantaged retirement accounts are protected from recovery in personal injury and libel suits. So, most people exclude these from net worth calculations for umbrella policies.

After 20 plus years in the industry, I can tell you that I never saw a case that did not resolve within the policy limits. When I previously researched whether to get an umbrella policy for our entire net worth or just a fraction of it, I also interviewed former classmates then working at AIG, Liberty Mutual, Chubb, and others, and they too were unaware of any case that resolved in excess of the policy limits. And, some of these folks handled excess casualty cases involving horrific accidents with estimated damages in excess of $20 million. Keep in mind that some of these cases went to a jury verdict, the verdict exceeded the policy limits, and the insurance companies after all appeals just tendered the policy limit to resolve the case. Plaintiff attorneys might seek more money beyond the policy from large, self-insured organizations, but none of my contacts was aware of them doing so against an individual. That's because most individuals just threaten bankruptcy, and the effort isn't worth it for plaintiff attorneys.

At the end of the day, it is a matter of risk tolerance, but the risk of a lawsuit recovery exceeding your policy limits and a plaintiff attorney who jumps through the hoops to try to collect is very unlikely.

[jrhampt]

We recently increased our 1 million to a 2 million umbrella policy.  I don't think I'll worry about holding much more than that in coverage.

[trollwithamustache]

The more "public" you are, the more you need the umbrella policy. are you a landlord? do you own a small business? (even a side hustle on a 1099).

We have an umbrella policy equal to net worth. its a couple hundred bucks.

[iris lily]

Umbrella insurance is cheap, get it to protect your stash.

Really we are not insurance people. We insure for the catastrophic stuff, we don’t sweat the small stuff. We don’t have life insurance. We don’t have anything but liability on most of our vehicles. We don’t have all of the other kinds of “little “ insurances that people have. ( If it was at all economically viable I would seriously consider long-term care insurance, but that is no longer a reasonable option.)  we are insured for the big stuff and of course along with that would never ever go without substantial healthcare insurance.

[norajean]

If you think you need $28 million in coverage and you can afford it, then by all means, see if an insurer will sell it to you.

[PDXTabs]

In addition, most tax advantaged retirement accounts are protected from recovery in personal injury and libel suits. So, most people exclude these from net worth calculations for umbrella policies.

...

That's because most individuals just threaten bankruptcy, and the effort isn't worth it for plaintiff attorneys.

Yup, I don't carry an umbrella policy because almost all of my net worth is sheltered from bankruptcy. However, if I had seven figures in a taxable account I sure as hell would have a policy!

We recently increased our 1 million to a 2 million umbrella policy.  I don't think I'll worry about holding much more than that in coverage.

If you are going to carry an umbrella policy I would personally carry enough to kill a software engineer with your car. That's going to be something like lifetime earnings + $500K. For a Google software engineer that would possibly be something like $13M.

[Paul der Krake]

This is based off my friends lawsuit from severe injuries they suffered from an at fault accident (other drivers fault). The plaintiff usually does not know defendants insurance coverage limit.  The insurance company lawyers will present it to the jury they have no insurance and it is all coming out of the defendants pocket (ignoring fact that insurance company is forking a lot of money for lawyers so obviously they have skin in the game).  So you don't know if you are clearing them out personally or leaving insurance money on the table.

This run contrary to my understanding of lawsuits. Isn’t coverage one of the first things that get disclosed during discovery?

I'm afraid that the above is mistaken. I'm not aware of any jurisdiction that does not require timely disclosure of all insurance policies during initial paper discovery. In addition, I'm also not aware of any jurisdiction that permits disclosure to the jury of the presence of insurance. Moreover, your net worth is generally not admissible, except in some limited circumstances such as malicious acts that open the door for punitive damages.

In addition, most tax advantaged retirement accounts are protected from recovery in personal injury and libel suits. So, most people exclude these from net worth calculations for umbrella policies.

After 20 plus years in the industry, I can tell you that I never saw a case that did not resolve within the policy limits. When I previously researched whether to get an umbrella policy for our entire net worth or just a fraction of it, I also interviewed former classmates then working at AIG, Liberty Mutual, Chubb, and others, and they too were unaware of any case that resolved in excess of the policy limits. And, some of these folks handled excess casualty cases involving horrific accidents with estimated damages in excess of $20 million. Keep in mind that some of these cases went to a jury verdict, the verdict exceeded the policy limits, and the insurance companies after all appeals just tendered the policy limit to resolve the case. Plaintiff attorneys might seek more money beyond the policy from large, self-insured organizations, but none of my contacts was aware of them doing so against an individual. That's because most individuals just threaten bankruptcy, and the effort isn't worth it for plaintiff attorneys.

At the end of the day, it is a matter of risk tolerance, but the risk of a lawsuit recovery exceeding your policy limits and a plaintiff attorney who jumps through the hoops to try to collect is very unlikely.

Are you saying that the odds of someone trying to go past the usual 300k or so of regular auto policy is unlikely and therefore we shouldn't bother with an umbrella policy? Or that 1m umbrella is likely more than sufficient?

[cool7hand]

It's a matter of risk tolerance. There's no one way to skin a cat.

[dignam]

I got an umbrella policy ($1M) years ago as I was a landlord.  I don't rent out properties anymore but kept the policy anyway.  You just never know if someone is going to slip on the tiny patch of ice on your sidewalk, then sue you.   I think mine is under $200/yr.

[joleran]

$3M umbrella policy at $450/yr, plus $150/yr for landlord status.  Moving down to $2M coverage would save only $100/yr.  I shop around 1-2x a year but never find rates as good as I get overall from home/auto/landlord/umbrella combined.

[obstinate]

I'm afraid that the above is mistaken. I'm not aware of any jurisdiction that does not require timely disclosure of all insurance policies during initial paper discovery. In addition, I'm also not aware of any jurisdiction that permits disclosure to the jury of the presence of insurance. Moreover, your net worth is generally not admissible, except in some limited circumstances such as malicious acts that open the door for punitive damages.

In addition, most tax advantaged retirement accounts are protected from recovery in personal injury and libel suits. So, most people exclude these from net worth calculations for umbrella policies.

After 20 plus years in the industry, I can tell you that I never saw a case that did not resolve within the policy limits. When I previously researched whether to get an umbrella policy for our entire net worth or just a fraction of it, I also interviewed former classmates then working at AIG, Liberty Mutual, Chubb, and others, and they too were unaware of any case that resolved in excess of the policy limits. And, some of these folks handled excess casualty cases involving horrific accidents with estimated damages in excess of $20 million. Keep in mind that some of these cases went to a jury verdict, the verdict exceeded the policy limits, and the insurance companies after all appeals just tendered the policy limit to resolve the case. Plaintiff attorneys might seek more money beyond the policy from large, self-insured organizations, but none of my contacts was aware of them doing so against an individual. That's because most individuals just threaten bankruptcy, and the effort isn't worth it for plaintiff attorneys.

At the end of the day, it is a matter of risk tolerance, but the risk of a lawsuit recovery exceeding your policy limits and a plaintiff attorney who jumps through the hoops to try to collect is very unlikely.

Wow, can I just say that there is more useful information in this one forum post than everything Google can turn up on the subject? Thank you! (Although I am not planning to decrease our coverage, since it is already a relatively small cost.)

[FIREby35]

This is based off my friends lawsuit from severe injuries they suffered from an at fault accident (other drivers fault). The plaintiff usually does not know defendants insurance coverage limit.  The insurance company lawyers will present it to the jury they have no insurance and it is all coming out of the defendants pocket (ignoring fact that insurance company is forking a lot of money for lawyers so obviously they have skin in the game).  So you don't know if you are clearing them out personally or leaving insurance money on the table.

This run contrary to my understanding of lawsuits. Isn’t coverage one of the first things that get disclosed during discovery?

I'm afraid that the above is mistaken. I'm not aware of any jurisdiction that does not require timely disclosure of all insurance policies during initial paper discovery. In addition, I'm also not aware of any jurisdiction that permits disclosure to the jury of the presence of insurance. Moreover, your net worth is generally not admissible, except in some limited circumstances such as malicious acts that open the door for punitive damages.

In addition, most tax advantaged retirement accounts are protected from recovery in personal injury and libel suits. So, most people exclude these from net worth calculations for umbrella policies.

After 20 plus years in the industry, I can tell you that I never saw a case that did not resolve within the policy limits. When I previously researched whether to get an umbrella policy for our entire net worth or just a fraction of it, I also interviewed former classmates then working at AIG, Liberty Mutual, Chubb, and others, and they too were unaware of any case that resolved in excess of the policy limits. And, some of these folks handled excess casualty cases involving horrific accidents with estimated damages in excess of $20 million. Keep in mind that some of these cases went to a jury verdict, the verdict exceeded the policy limits, and the insurance companies after all appeals just tendered the policy limit to resolve the case. Plaintiff attorneys might seek more money beyond the policy from large, self-insured organizations, but none of my contacts was aware of them doing so against an individual. That's because most individuals just threaten bankruptcy, and the effort isn't worth it for plaintiff attorneys.

At the end of the day, it is a matter of risk tolerance, but the risk of a lawsuit recovery exceeding your policy limits and a plaintiff attorney who jumps through the hoops to try to collect is very unlikely.

Are you saying that the odds of someone trying to go past the usual 300k or so of regular auto policy is unlikely and therefore we shouldn't bother with an umbrella policy? Or that 1m umbrella is likely more than sufficient?

Personal Injury Lawyer here, I do a lot of work to make sure insurance companies pay every red cent I earn. In fact, there are ways to make the insurance company pay above the policy limits and I always "set the table" to make sure the person I sue will never have to pay anything. They never know it, but I do much more work to protect the person I sue than their own lawyer (bought and paid for by the insurance company). Say what you will, but that is a stone cold fact and much more common than most imagine.

The better way of thinking of all of this is that your insurance will PROTECT YOU if someone without enough insurance negligently INJURES YOU. Most (Every?) state has "Underinsured Motorist" and "Uninsured Motorist" coverage in their legally mandated insurance policies. This protects you in the event someone with a state minimum insurance policy runs a red light and causes you to suffer catastrophic injuries.

Think about it, if you are the injured person and the other person is underinsured/uninsured - what happens? Answer: You make a claim on your own underinsured/uninsured motorist policy. This happens much more often than Justin Verlander slipping and falling and causing a major liability! So, quit worrying about being held liable by some dastardly plaintiff lawyer for a freak accident and and worry about what YOUR plaintiff lawyer will want to see after a catastrophic injury when they are HELPING YOU! :)

I know it's hard to imagine, but Plaintiff lawyers aren't your enemy unless you are an insurance company or an insurance defense lawyer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMrjQNfd-J8&list=LLl9PURf0c65Y83tEKNB3snw&index=169 Even the insurance defense lawyers like me since they get paid by the hour to fight me!

When it comes to an umbrella policy, make sure it will protect you in the event of an underinsured/uninsured driver causing major injury. I had a case the other day, the client bought 1 million in umbrella coverage but it was for LIABILITY ONLY (i.e. it protected him from being sued, but did not protect himself from the medical bills caused by the other person!). That was a State Farm policy, not some fly-by-night operation. After this client received 500k+ in medical bills from a crash he did not cause and he learned his umbrella policy was useless, he was very disappointed.

The VAST majority of people are afraid of plaintiff lawyers when they need to be afraid of their underinsured neighbors and insurance companies. Protect yourself by having sufficient underinsured/uninsured coverage in your property and casualty insurance :)

[simonsez]

This thread inspired me to call my agent.  He said that I would need to up my existing auto from 100k/300k to 250k/500k before an umbrella policy of 1m (the lowest one, they go up in 1m increments) would be available.  Whatever the house needs to be at (to be able to purchase an umbrella policy) was already met by my current homeowner's policy.  This was with All State.

[Tempname23]

I'm a little disappointed in the Umbrella policy quotes I'm getting. I'm in Fl, have three cars, a home and a piece of vacant land. No violations on our drivers licenses, no lawsuits. The first quote was $559 and to add underinsured/uninsured motorist cover age was an additional $510. That is a $1M policy.
 I got a second quote it was $311, but I had to have my auto with them, the auto is $240 a year more than the company I'm with. To add the underinsured/uninsured motorist to the umbrella was an additional $290.
 If anyone is in Florida and has a company that is cheaper, please mention the name, so I can get a quote. Thanks

[EricEng]

I'm afraid that the above is mistaken. I'm not aware of any jurisdiction that does not require timely disclosure of all insurance policies during initial paper discovery. In addition, I'm also not aware of any jurisdiction that permits disclosure to the jury of the presence of insurance. Moreover, your net worth is generally not admissible, except in some limited circumstances such as malicious acts that open the door for punitive damages.

In addition, most tax advantaged retirement accounts are protected from recovery in personal injury and libel suits. So, most people exclude these from net worth calculations for umbrella policies.

After 20 plus years in the industry, I can tell you that I never saw a case that did not resolve within the policy limits. When I previously researched whether to get an umbrella policy for our entire net worth or just a fraction of it, I also interviewed former classmates then working at AIG, Liberty Mutual, Chubb, and others, and they too were unaware of any case that resolved in excess of the policy limits. And, some of these folks handled excess casualty cases involving horrific accidents with estimated damages in excess of $20 million. Keep in mind that some of these cases went to a jury verdict, the verdict exceeded the policy limits, and the insurance companies after all appeals just tendered the policy limit to resolve the case. Plaintiff attorneys might seek more money beyond the policy from large, self-insured organizations, but none of my contacts was aware of them doing so against an individual. That's because most individuals just threaten bankruptcy, and the effort isn't worth it for plaintiff attorneys.

At the end of the day, it is a matter of risk tolerance, but the risk of a lawsuit recovery exceeding your policy limits and a plaintiff attorney who jumps through the hoops to try to collect is very unlikely.

I'm going off word of mouth from my friend/coworker over a 12 month saga right up to the statute of limitations for the injury in our state.  The other driver disclosed they had insurance obviously, but they definitely couldn't present limits in court to the jury, which we agree on it appears.  She made it sound like she didn't know defendant's limits either though.  During the jury trial defendant's insurance lawyers tried to make it out that the jury would be taking personally from that man and ruining him financially for life with massive debt obligations.

Plaintiff was just asking for reimbursement for actual medical costs experienced (spinal injury) to tune of six figures and anticipated medical costs for next 3 years of treatment.

[phildonnia]

I'm going off word of mouth from my friend/coworker over a 12 month saga right up to the statute of limitations for the injury in our state.  The other driver disclosed they had insurance obviously, but they definitely couldn't present limits in court to the jury, which we agree on it appears.  She made it sound like she didn't know defendant's limits either though.  During the jury trial defendant's insurance lawyers tried to make it out that the jury would be taking personally from that man and ruining him financially for life with massive debt obligations.

Plaintiff was just asking for reimbursement for actual medical costs experienced (spinal injury) to tune of six figures and anticipated medical costs for next 3 years of treatment.

Well, that's why I chose the hypothetical example I did.  I'm not talking about gold diggers walking into a tree limb.  I think people like that will go away if you just give them a thousand bucks.  I want protection against the possibility that I will cause someone a real, legitimate injury, that needs to be made whole. 

But if claims are in any way related to insurance coverage, then why pay more for higher coverage? 

There's also a distinction that needs to be made between actual and punitive damages.  Punitive damages are intended to hurt the defendant.  Would a court say, okay, you need to be punished with a $1MM loss, but since you have $2MM in insurance, lets make that $3MM?  Again, what is the point of even having coverage then?

[Laura33]

So, first, don't worry about punitive damages.  They are very rare, very hard to get, and don't apply in the kinds of claims you'd be likely to be involved in -- and if they did, I doubt insurance would cover that anyway.  Just behave reasonably and you should be fine.  What you have to worry about are things like pain and suffering, economic loss (if someone can't do their job any more), and long-term care costs.  Which can be huge in and of themselves. 

The way it was described earlier is what I recall:  the existence and amount of insurance is discoverable, but it cannot be presented to the jury, because you don't want a jury to say, hey, the guy has a $2M insurance policy, let's award $2M in pain and suffering for a $25K injury, it's just the insurance company.  Now, personally, I don't think you should be able to talk about finances the other way, either; the jury's job is supposed to be to figure out who was at fault and how much that injury cost.  If the plaintiffs can't point out that the defendants have insurance to cover those costs, then the defendants shouldn't be able to whine about how the claim will bankrupt them. 

As a practical matter, yes, most cases settle for the insurance limits.  Because most people don't have money!  But that's not an actual rule or requirement.  If you get a $3M judgment against you, and you have $1M in insurance, the plaintiff has ever right to expect you to pay the $2M difference out of your own assets.  Yes, some assets will probably be protected, and that's going to be different in every state, but you have a legal judgment against you for $2M, and they can recover directly from you. 

I don't think it's reasonable to expect perfection or insure against every risk, and I'm not trying to.  But I got umbrella insurance years ago, because I know I'm a target.  I'm a lawyer.  People are going to look at me and think I'm rich, even if I'm not -- and I'm going to get zero sympathy from any jury around here.  And I don't want one stupid or thoughtless moment (and I have ADD, so I definitely have them) -- to wipe out everything that I've worked for for decades.  I think I have $2M.  So if I take out Justin Verlander, I'm fucked, but it should be enough to entice a settlement for the vast majority of the kinds of claims that I could be involved in. 

And yes, I did need to have certain auto and home limits to qualify for the insurance.  But I already had those higher auto limits out of the same concerns that led to the umbrella insurance. 

[phildonnia]

This thread inspired me to call my agent.  He said that I would need to up my existing auto from 100k/300k to 250k/500k before an umbrella policy of 1m (the lowest one, they go up in 1m increments) would be available.  Whatever the house needs to be at (to be able to purchase an umbrella policy) was already met by my current homeowner's policy.  This was with All State.

That's pretty standard to require very high coverage on your auto insurance as a condition of getting umbrella coverage.  All the insurance companies have that.

[iris lily]

This thread caused me to look again st our umbrella coverage and take it ip a milli9n. It does not cover our assets. The cost will be around $1,100 annually.

[Arbitrage]

Another thing to consider is that 401(k) plans, and IRAs in some states, are not touchable by lawsuits.  ERISA protections.  If the bulk of your net worth is in those types of plans, it should factor in to whether or not you want to lay out the cash for an umbrella plan. 

[Paul der Krake]

This thread caused me to look again st our umbrella coverage and take it ip a milli9n. It does not cover our assets. The cost will be around $1,100 annually.

Is there a typo here?

I pay around $600 for auto, renters, and umbrella, per year, combined!

[Paul der Krake]

This thread caused me to look again st our umbrella coverage and take it ip a milli9n. It does not cover our assets. The cost will be around $1,100 annually.

Is there a typo here?

I pay around $600 for auto, renters, and umbrella, per year, combined!

Is there a typo here?! That sounds extremely low to me, but I’m in an expensive insurance state. What company are you with?

All GEICO policies underwritten for Hawaii.

Breakdown:
$165 auto every 6 months, 300/300/100 liability
$124 renters every 12 months, 300 liability
$154 umbrella every 12 months, 1m liability

I realize that my state in on the cheaper side for auto, but not crazily so. On the mainland the highest paid for the same coverage was around $300 every 6 months in Seattle. For some reason umbrella and renters are slightly more expensive here though.

But I've never seen umbrella policies costing $1,100/year, even with the maximum 10m coverage. So I'm curious how @iris lily is getting such numbers.

[iris lily]

This thread caused me to look again st our umbrella coverage and take it ip a milli9n. It does not cover our assets. The cost will be around $1,100 annually.

Is there a typo here?

I pay around $600 for auto, renters, and umbrella, per year, combined!

That $1,200 ish is just for umbrella insurance. We pay a lot more in addition for auto insurance but then of course we have 4+ vehicles.

One pays a premium to live in the urban core where car break-ins, car thefts, looting and rioting take place on the regular. Thug life does affect our pocketbook.

Provider is Allstate. I thought it was cheaper to until I talk to our agent a couple days ago. But it is what it is and it allows me to sleep at night so it’s fine.

[phildonnia]

I'm now paying $271 for $2MM in coverage, through "Stillwater Insurance Group". 

[zinnie]

This thread inspired me to call my agent.  He said that I would need to up my existing auto from 100k/300k to 250k/500k before an umbrella policy of 1m (the lowest one, they go up in 1m increments) would be available.  Whatever the house needs to be at (to be able to purchase an umbrella policy) was already met by my current homeowner's policy.  This was with All State.

That's pretty standard to require very high coverage on your auto insurance as a condition of getting umbrella coverage.  All the insurance companies have that.

I tried to get umbrella insurance recently and was surprised to find that they wouldn't sell it to me since I don't have car insurance/ don't own a car. Apparently they would require a non-owners car insurance policy first. I already get supplemental liability whenever I rent a car, but it upped the cost significantly to need to add on non-owners car insurance for the whole year. You'd think I'd be more attractive to them since I rarely drive!

To echo what others have said, I've been reading a lot about this on Bogleheads and many seemed to be of the mind that just having a policy for ~$1-2M meant that the insurance company would be motivated to defend you in court, and if it came to that offer an attractive settlement.

[jrhampt]

Mine's $370 for $2M coverage through Allstate.

[Paul der Krake]

This thread caused me to look again st our umbrella coverage and take it ip a milli9n. It does not cover our assets. The cost will be around $1,100 annually.

Is there a typo here?

I pay around $600 for auto, renters, and umbrella, per year, combined!

That $1,200 ish is just for umbrella insurance. We pay a lot more in addition for auto insurance but then of course we have 4+ vehicles.

One pays a premium to live in the urban core where car break-ins, car thefts, looting and rioting take place on the regular. Thug life does affect our pocketbook.

Provider is Allstate. I thought it was cheaper to until I talk to our agent a couple days ago. But it is what it is and it allows me to sleep at night so it’s fine.

My old zipcode in Seattle was also in the urban core and refused to be out-protested by the People's Republic of Portland, so we saw our fair share of breakins and protests. But really it shouldn't matter for the cost of liability insurance, which is what umbrella policies provide.

You mentioned 4 cars. Any teenage drivers that could be causing premiums to be this high?

[iris lily]

This thread caused me to look again st our umbrella coverage and take it ip a milli9n. It does not cover our assets. The cost will be around $1,100 annually.

Is there a typo here?

I pay around $600 for auto, renters, and umbrella, per year, combined!

That $1,200 ish is just for umbrella insurance. We pay a lot more in addition for auto insurance but then of course we have 4+ vehicles.

One pays a premium to live in the urban core where car break-ins, car thefts, looting and rioting take place on the regular. Thug life does affect our pocketbook.

Provider is Allstate. I thought it was cheaper to until I talk to our agent a couple days ago. But it is what it is and it allows me to sleep at night so it’s fine.

My old zipcode in Seattle was also in the urban core and refused to be out-protested by the People's Republic of Portland, so we saw our fair share of breakins and protests. But really it shouldn't matter for the cost of liability insurance, which is what umbrella policies provide.

You mentioned 4 cars. Any teenage drivers that could be causing premiums to be this high?

Nope we are old people. In fact a certain age Our auto insurance went down.We have no claims on insurance ever in 30 years. we’ve had the same company for 30 years never had at one claim.

[wageslave23]

This thread caused me to look again st our umbrella coverage and take it ip a milli9n. It does not cover our assets. The cost will be around $1,100 annually.

Is there a typo here?

I pay around $600 for auto, renters, and umbrella, per year, combined!

That $1,200 ish is just for umbrella insurance. We pay a lot more in addition for auto insurance but then of course we have 4+ vehicles.

One pays a premium to live in the urban core where car break-ins, car thefts, looting and rioting take place on the regular. Thug life does affect our pocketbook.

Provider is Allstate. I thought it was cheaper to until I talk to our agent a couple days ago. But it is what it is and it allows me to sleep at night so it’s fine.

My old zipcode in Seattle was also in the urban core and refused to be out-protested by the People's Republic of Portland, so we saw our fair share of breakins and protests. But really it shouldn't matter for the cost of liability insurance, which is what umbrella policies provide.

You mentioned 4 cars. Any teenage drivers that could be causing premiums to be this high?

Nope we are old people. In fact a certain age Our auto insurance went down.We have no claims on insurance ever in 30 years. we’ve had the same company for 30 years never had at one claim.

Maybe its time to shop around.

[seattlecyclone]

This thread caused me to look again st our umbrella coverage and take it ip a milli9n. It does not cover our assets. The cost will be around $1,100 annually.

Is there a typo here?

I pay around $600 for auto, renters, and umbrella, per year, combined!

That $1,200 ish is just for umbrella insurance. We pay a lot more in addition for auto insurance but then of course we have 4+ vehicles.

One pays a premium to live in the urban core where car break-ins, car thefts, looting and rioting take place on the regular. Thug life does affect our pocketbook.

Provider is Allstate. I thought it was cheaper to until I talk to our agent a couple days ago. But it is what it is and it allows me to sleep at night so it’s fine.

My old zipcode in Seattle was also in the urban core and refused to be out-protested by the People's Republic of Portland, so we saw our fair share of breakins and protests. But really it shouldn't matter for the cost of liability insurance, which is what umbrella policies provide.

Yep. We've had two catalytic converter thefts in the past year. My insurance company had no reason to care because we have a liability-only policy. The comprehensive coverage would have been worth it this year, but not enough to make up for the past decade where we would not have made any claims.

Our latest insurance bills:
Car (liability only, 15-year-old Prius): $148/6 months
Homeowners ($400k replacement cost, 1% deductible): $610/year
Umbrella ($2 million): $235/year

[PDXTabs]

I haven't had a comprehensive claim in a long time, but it's so cheap that I still carry it anyway. Vandalism, falling trees, deer in the road, etc. It seems like cheap insurance for and expensive piece of property.

[iris lily]

I was wrong that our umbrella insurance is $1200 a year, it’s not that much.p but still may be high at $847. Here is what our insurance guy says where PUP is umbrella coverage:

Your PUP is $847/year for 3 million with 4 cars, specialty auto, and 3 properties.
63104 is a factor

[meandmyfamily]

Update:  Our umbrella doesn't cover under and uninsured motorists.  I never knew that.  I guess I need to up my auto to the max.  What coverage do you all have? I do have 2 teen drivers.

This has been very helpful.  I was surprised how much "youthful" drivers raised the umbrella policy but my costs are still lower than many of you.  It does seem to vary a lot by region.  They also charge a bit more for rental properties.  I just asked about under and uninsured motorists.  Anything else I should ask about?

[jac941]

Update:  Our umbrella doesn't cover under and uninsured motorists.  I never knew that.  I guess I need to up my auto to the max.  What coverage do you all have? I do have 2 teen drivers.

This has been very helpful.  I was surprised how much "youthful" drivers raised the umbrella policy but my costs are still lower than many of you.  It does seem to vary a lot by region.  They also charge a bit more for rental properties.  I just asked about under and uninsured motorists.  Anything else I should ask about?

I was rear ended by a car while riding my bicycle and was very seriously injured. The person driving was at fault and there were numerous witnesses so the police report reflects that he was at fault (it was egregious). The insurance information the driver provided was for a policy not in effect on the date of the incident — he was effectively uninsured.

Based on my personal experience, I would recommend having the maximum medpay (usually $100,000) and at least $1 million in uninsured and underinsured motorist insurance. This is what we have, and I’m thankful for it now. The med pay is very important because it provides money for medical bills while you wait for the rest of the insurance claim to settle. This can easily take years when injuries are severe.

[seattlecyclone]

Update:  Our umbrella doesn't cover under and uninsured motorists.  I never knew that.  I guess I need to up my auto to the max.  What coverage do you all have? I do have 2 teen drivers.

This has been very helpful.  I was surprised how much "youthful" drivers raised the umbrella policy but my costs are still lower than many of you.  It does seem to vary a lot by region.  They also charge a bit more for rental properties.  I just asked about under and uninsured motorists.  Anything else I should ask about?

I have a $2 million umbrella policy. I do not have uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage. Everyone should carry sufficient medical insurance, disability insurance, and life insurance so that a car crash or other accident won't cause financial ruin, regardless of whose fault it is. Once you have those general-purpose insurances in place, underinsured motorist coverage just seems superfluous. Does the amount of money I need to recover from injuries differ if the accident was my own fault or someone else's? Not really. Then why buy insurance that will pay you more for a car crash with an uninsured motorist than it will pay you for a car crash with a tree?

[meandmyfamily]

We do have all the other coverages but I have a friend who was in a bad accident and the person at fault was under insured.  They did eventually pay out on the bills but it was a fight.  It is quite costly for me to add more with teen drivers.  Interesting the differing advice. 

[Paul der Krake]

Update:  Our umbrella doesn't cover under and uninsured motorists.  I never knew that.  I guess I need to up my auto to the max.  What coverage do you all have? I do have 2 teen drivers.

This has been very helpful.  I was surprised how much "youthful" drivers raised the umbrella policy but my costs are still lower than many of you.  It does seem to vary a lot by region.  They also charge a bit more for rental properties.  I just asked about under and uninsured motorists.  Anything else I should ask about?

I have a $2 million umbrella policy. I do not have uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage. Everyone should carry sufficient medical insurance, disability insurance, and life insurance so that a car crash or other accident won't cause financial ruin, regardless of whose fault it is. Once you have those general-purpose insurances in place, underinsured motorist coverage just seems superfluous. Does the amount of money I need to recover from injuries differ if the accident was my own fault or someone else's? Not really. Then why buy insurance that will pay you more for a car crash with an uninsured motorist than it will pay you for a car crash with a tree?

Yeah I've never really understood why people fixate on underinsured/uninsured coverage for the medical part. In the absolute worst case scenario it will save you a couple years of deductible and copays. Maybe a leftover fear from the days before guaranteed health insurance issue? Or maybe it's just a more primal instinct tapping into our sense of fairness, I didn't cause this, I shouldn't have to pay.

[lutorm]

Update:  Our umbrella doesn't cover under and uninsured motorists.  I never knew that.  I guess I need to up my auto to the max.  What coverage do you all have? I do have 2 teen drivers.

This has been very helpful.  I was surprised how much "youthful" drivers raised the umbrella policy but my costs are still lower than many of you.  It does seem to vary a lot by region.  They also charge a bit more for rental properties.  I just asked about under and uninsured motorists.  Anything else I should ask about?

I have a $2 million umbrella policy. I do not have uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage. Everyone should carry sufficient medical insurance, disability insurance, and life insurance so that a car crash or other accident won't cause financial ruin, regardless of whose fault it is. Once you have those general-purpose insurances in place, underinsured motorist coverage just seems superfluous. Does the amount of money I need to recover from injuries differ if the accident was my own fault or someone else's? Not really. Then why buy insurance that will pay you more for a car crash with an uninsured motorist than it will pay you for a car crash with a tree?

Yeah I've never really understood why people fixate on underinsured/uninsured coverage for the medical part. In the absolute worst case scenario it will save you a couple years of deductible and copays. Maybe a leftover fear from the days before guaranteed health insurance issue? Or maybe it's just a more primal instinct tapping into our sense of fairness, I didn't cause this, I shouldn't have to pay.

I've been hit by an uninsured driver. I did not receive any severe injuries, but between the health insurance deductible, copays and the lost vehicle, I was probably out 2-3 grand, and that was a severe strain on my finances (this was in grad school.)

Just because you have medical insurance doesn't mean there will be no costs, so it's a matter of whether you're willing to accept the residual risk. If you screw up, there's no option but to pay those costs, but that's a risk/cost trade off you can make yourself. You have very little control over the risk imposed on you by others.