ridiculous question ACORN damage???

[raytseng]

Well you are an outlier with 7 cars. Most people do not have 7 cars. 7 cars means the majority of the time they are just sitting doing nothing and apparently not in use. So your making a apples to oranges comparison by 7x.
The argument still lies why do you have conprehensive at all, if as you said you made 1 claim over 10years, just decline comp altogether or at least for the cars that are garage queens.

Your 1 claim in 10 years for 7 cars is an equivilant to 1 claim per 70 car-coverage years.

If you had 1 car then itd be different math the increase would not be 300, itd be divided by 7. But that car would be a daily driver so your claim rate would maybe the same it wouldnt be a claim every 70 years.


Still i appreciate that you did do the math, and it does not make sense for you especially to add it on for all 7 cars. But perhaps you should question why you have comp at all.

 

[Astro14]

I don't have collision on the 4 Runner...and you bring up a valid point about comp...with 3 of the cars worth less than $5K...are they worth insuring?

I've answered that question with a "yes"...because I really can't take a $4-5K hit with the loss of a car...and the comp includes the uninsured motorist and other coverages...which I reckon to be more likely than an accident that's my fault.

Now, collision itself might come off the two Volvos soon...as they both near 200K miles, the amount of payout in a claim isn't likely to be much...and removing that coverage would save about $500/year...

And I'm not cynical...just realistic about how they make their money...I self-insure the amount that I can reasonably cover. Sure, I might never have a claim with a $1K deductible...but the few thousand that an accident costs isn't the reason that I've got insurance. I've got it for the $500,000 in liability...or the huge medical payments...those I really can't afford to self-insure...