Random insurance question.

[buellistic]

If my house payment is 49.91
Shouldn't my 500 dollar car be ..like 50cents?
State farm..:wtf

 

[ejv]

How much is it to rebuild your house?

Maybe your homeowners should be more? I wouldn't give them any ideas.

 

[sckego]

If you change all your vehicle deductibles to the same as your home insurance, it probably would be 50 cents.

 

[Butch]

My moto insurance is like $2.
Per month, per bike. $100K liability only.

Not 50 cents, but...

Edit... cages are still $200 a year each. Liability only, and I do have a $2M umbrella liability policy. I forget what that costs. It was cheep initially.

 

[buellistic]

How much is it to rebuild your house?

Maybe your homeowners should be more? I wouldn't give them any ideas.

I hope not more....

 

[TylerW]

You don't drive your house around every day in places where it can crash into other houses, or people.

 

[berth]

You don't drive your house around every day in places where it can crash into other houses, or people.

Yea, but think of all those accidents and injuries within a short distance from home. Which is why it's best practice to move away from someplace so dangerous.

 

[ctwo]

My moto insurance is like $2.
Per month, per bike. $100K liability only.

Not 50 cents, but...

Edit... cages are still $200 a year each. Liability only, and I do have a $2M umbrella liability policy. I forget what that costs. It was cheep initially.

CA requires un-/under-insured motorist coverage be offered. How do you get around that? It's expensive.

 

[fraz]

CA requires un-/under-insured motorist coverage be offered. How do you get around that? It's expensive.

You kind of stated it yourself. The under/uninsured coverage must be offered. But it has been opt-in for a long time now. They found that requiring it was not lawful many years ago and stopped forcing it.

My advice TO ALL HOMEOWNERS is to call your agent and make sure your home premium is high enough to cover rebuild cost for what you want in the current financial climate. I learned this by watching my brother go through aftermath of losing his home in Santa Rosa (he left the state). Basically if you don't pay a high enough premium, you will never be able to rebuild if you do lose your house in a fire. Going rate now is like $400-500 per square foot for building a decent home (can go up for fancy-ass appliances, etc.). Everybody should contact their insurance agent, get re-rated based upon current rebuild costs, bite the bullet, pay the premium increase. And do this every couple years. Why? Cause the insurance companies don't give a F if they have to pay out less or if you can't rebuild your home, they are just a machine.

/preach

 

[DucatiHoney]

It's been said here a couple of times in different ways: you get what you pay for. If you're like me, that bill probably shows that you're probably at the bare minimum on your vehicle coverage and you're probably woefully under-covered on your home. :laughing

I've done enough work with insurance companies in my job that I have come away with the impression that insurance is sort of like playing against the house at the casino: the whole thing is rigged to be in their favor. They wouldn't be in business otherwise. You have to play the game in this case, but you can minimize your exposure to loss by purchasing insurance that truly covers your risks. That doesn't mean that the insurance company is going to happily pay out. It's still going to be a battle if something truly catastrophic happens, and trust me, their lawyers are good at what they do. However, if you're insured for very little, you're still going to have to fight for that, and you still end up with a small payout. At least if you have good insurance, in theory, you could walk away being mostly covered. The gap in payout is what really hurts most people I see, so get that covered. House fire payouts for instance often take years to settle with the insurance company, so make sure your insurance covers your hotel stay close to your work!

 

[sckego]

insurance is sort of like playing against the house at the casino: the whole thing is rigged to be in their favor. They wouldn't be in business otherwise. You have to play the game in this case, but you can minimize your exposure to loss by purchasing insurance that truly covers your risks.

Exactly this. Insurance is almost always a losing proposition for the insured, unless you happen to hit the jackpot (ie, lose your house and have it covered). Don't bother with insurance that you don't need. If you break your phone, could you afford to replace it without a huge impact to your life? Great, then it doesn't need to be insured. How about if you wreck your moto? A bit more expensive, but hopefully not life-altering if you need to pay a few $k to replace it. What if you are at fault for a collision that results in six-figure medical bills for the other parties, or if your house burns down? - that's the kind of stuff that can ruin people's lives if they are not adequately insured. Don't sweat the small stuff, but make damn sure you have enough coverage for the big stuff.

 

[fraz]

It's been said here a couple of times in different ways: you get what you pay for. If you're like me, that bill probably shows that you're probably at the bare minimum on your vehicle coverage and you're probably woefully under-covered on your home. :laughing

I've done enough work with insurance companies in my job that I have come away with the impression that insurance is sort of like playing against the house at the casino: the whole thing is rigged to be in their favor. They wouldn't be in business otherwise. You have to play the game in this case, but you can minimize your exposure to loss by purchasing insurance that truly covers your risks. That doesn't mean that the insurance company is going to happily pay out. It's still going to be a battle if something truly catastrophic happens, and trust me, their lawyers are good at what they do. However, if you're insured for very little, you're still going to have to fight for that, and you still end up with a small payout. At least if you have good insurance, in theory, you could walk away being mostly covered. The gap in payout is what really hurts most people I see, so get that covered. House fire payouts for instance often take years to settle with the insurance company, so make sure your insurance covers your hotel stay close to your work!

#thetruth :thumbup

 

[dravnx]

Carry as much uninsured/underinsured as your carrier will provide. A simple accident can cost you your life savings or future earnings if the other party has no insurance or the minimum PLPD.

 

[ctwo]

You kind of stated it yourself. The under/uninsured coverage must be offered. But it has been opt-in for a long time now. They found that requiring it was not lawful many years ago and stopped forcing it.

I guess it depends on the insurance company. My experience is that they will quote you without it, then after you pay will automatically add it to your policy and send you an invoice.

Carry as much uninsured/underinsured as your carrier will provide. A simple accident can cost you your life savings or future earnings if the other party has no insurance or the minimum PLPD.

It's probably a good idea. I figure the most likely scenario is that the motorcyclists is found at fault anyway, or the other party never stops and it's classed as a single vehicle accident. Then I think there were cases where insurers would not pay unless you could prove the other party did not have insurance, which is hard to do with a hit/run.

My next policy will probably exchange the collision and comprehensive for UIUIM. Bike is probably not even worth $10k anymore and any mild injury accident will probably convince me to stop riding anyway.