Liability only?

[roadracer311]

So, every car I've ever owned (for the last 22 years) has only been covered with liability coverage. I've never made a claim, and never wished I had more coverage. During this time, I'd guess that I've saved between $10k and $20k by not having full coverage.

The Boxster is the first car where I've had full coverage, but seeing as I only drive it on weekends, I'm thinking of going liability only.

My current break down (per year) is:
$1,407 per year for full coverage
$472 of this is liability
$244 of this is comprehensive
$628 is collision

In most discussions here it sounds like most people have full coverage. Anyone gone with liability only and regretted it?

[rick3000]

I am sure anyone with liability only coverage that totaled their car ended up regretting it. I have full coverage, because like any insurance it's a safety net and protects me in the event that something does happen. Plus my Boxster is a DD, so it makes sense.
It's all measuring risk, if your only driving on the weekends and good driver I don't see why you need full coverage. But if somethings does happen (it's impossible to say now) you might regret it.

[Lil bastard]

I have carried full coverage on at least 3 cars (as many as eight) since Nixon was in the White House and have never had a single claim... not one!

Yea... it irks me to write the check, but then again, I have been well covered. The fact I've never used it didn't diminish the security it provided.

My Boxster is on specialty insurance, - Liability + Agreed Value. Mileage limited to 5k/yr.+carryover (which I've never come close to exceeding - own 4 other cars between 2 people, and I office from home - no daily commute) - annual premium $244.

I do have a mid-'90's SUV (the 'Mule') which has less than 100k on it and is still in excellent shape both mechanically and aesthetically - have spent less than $50/yr. on upkeep the past 5 yrs. It's used through the winter and as the hauler. 2 yrs. ago I dropped the collision because the market value for it is essentially non-existant. I couldn't get $500 for it today, but it's worth much more than that to me. But that's the only car I've ever, or would ever, consider not having full coverage for.

IMHO, carrying limited coverage on a Boxster is the essence of 'False Economy'. If it's not a DD, consider looking into specialty coverage instead of dropping full coverage.

You may say you've saved $10k - $20k through the years, and undoubtedly you may have, but that is in no way a raving endorsement of your practice. In reality you've only been lucky... but others may not be. Proper insurance mitigates reliance on luck.

[crios]

I have full coverage, max on everything and live in CA with 18 years of driving experience.

My car is listed as a pleasure vehicle as well, which makes my insurance cheaper than usual, 6K miles driven a year or less.

My current break down (per year) is:
$789 per year for full coverage (with 1 point on my record and $1000 deductable)

$329 – Bodily Injury – 250K/500K
$104 - Uninsured Motorist – 250K/500K
$239 – Collision
$78 – Comprehensive (other than Collision)
$25 – Rental Car
$14 – Waiver of deductible (Uninsured Motorist)

I highly….highly recommend the last one. I’ve been hit twice by an uninsured motorist…once totaling my 99 Boxster. Worst thing is paying your own deductible when it was not even your fault.



If you want to save some money, raise you deductable. Most damage on our cars is always a couple of thousand. If less, in my opionion, better to pay out of pocket than to have your rates go up. You can also save some money if you use the same insurance carrier for your home owners insurance. I use Travelers and have had about 4-5 different incidents in 18 years and have always been impressed with their service. Plus they also helped get me my 03 below when my 99 was totaled

[coreseller]

I guess I ought to consider myself lucky, when I ad on the Boxster to the policy it runs about and additional $400 per year with a $1k deduct. Multicar discount kicks in also though. I like many view insurance as a catastrophic safety net, I don't make claims unless I absolutely have to. My fear on liability only is that an accident / event occurs at a bad time (like now; tax time, yearly tuition lump payment time, just paid for a new roof time, newfangled front load washer/dryer time, etc.) and the financial outlay proves devastating. I have had full coverage on everything since my early 20's when my vehicles were usually worthless beaters.

[Brucelee]

Well, if you car is stolen, assume it is not coming back.

If you are hit by another driver in CA, assume he does NOT have insurance. He won't most likely.

You need at least $250K liability if you have any assets to protect.

I carry collison. I don't want to be out a whole car.

[gregdacat]

I taught two daughters to drive a stick. Had to have full coverage. Unfortunately had to use it too. I have one daughter that thinks that white fog line on the edge of the road is where you are supposed to drive.

Plus in KY if you have comprehensive you are entitled to one windshield replacement per year at no charge (it has to be damaged of course) and it cannot affect your premiums or rating. No comprehensive and you're paying for the windshield out of pocket.

[Paul]

If your car is financed with the car as collateral or leased, you must have collision and comprehensive as deemed necessary by the terms of the loan.

[944boy]

My 944 has minimum coverage. It's a race car and most likely will be totaled at the track. Insurance won't do squat about that. But it has been without collision since we've owned it for the last 7 years. Only been hit once while I have owned it.

The Boxster has full everything which is expensive since I am still under 25 and put 15-20K a year as a daily driver. But if it gets wrecked I want cash for another.