Question about insurance- is full coverage worth it ? (based on my situation)

[felixthecat]

I have everything except collision covered. Collision is just way too expensive (they want $900 per year for my $2700 bike!).

My biggest worry is damage from someone backing into it. That falls under "collision". Comprehensive by itself to cover theft/vandalism was relatively cheap.

One would think uninsured motorist property damage covers hit-and-run cases, but not for California...

 

[rodr]

Insurance companies make a profit, so in the long run you can expect to lose money by insuring stuff. Reasons to have insurance are (1) it's required by law, (2) you cannot afford to lose what's being insured, or (3) you know something that the insurer doesn't.

In my experience insuring older vehicles is so not worth it. Same premiums, less benefit.

As for peace of mind... not so much. insurers often make it a big hassle to collect on legitimate claims, especially where big bucks are involved.

 

[rick]

Adding comprehensive to my collision coverage only added $20 to my 6-month premium for one of the bikes with State Farm. It's the collision that costs money ...which seems backward to me for motorcycles where a simple tip over can total a bike but there you go.

 

[minhtin]

Not to mention your premium takes a hike as soon as you make a claim. The money I saved over the last decade by not having full coverage pretty much allowed me to buy two brand new bikes with cash.

 

[Alan_Hepburn]

One would think uninsured motorist property damage covers hit-and-run cases, but not for California...

If it's a hit-and-run how do you know they are uninsured?

 

[felixthecat]

If it's a hit-and-run how do you know they are uninsured?

Not providing insurance information (in a hit-and-run) is the same to me as not having insurance information to provide, but maybe I'm just being crazy for thinking the default should be to assume the at-fault party has no insurance until it can be proven otherwise

 

[Butch]

I pay myself the insurance premiums...

 

[Ironbutt]

It's in SF? I've fully cover it by two insurance companies to the fullest extent. LOL.. it'll pay off.

Kidding aside, yes. any bike I ride on the road is fully covered. People will hit and run your ass and run your bike over and you'll be SCREWED otherwise. Totally screwed.

 

[alemeno214]

Depends on the bike, and if you're willing to have the bike totaled or stolen. When I had my $900 Radian, I didn't bother with anything but liability. If it was stolen of totaled, it wouldn't be the end of the world. My Ninja on the other hand is worth more, and I'd be pretty pissed if any happened to it, so I hold full coverage with a low deductible.

On a side note, I thought it was funny that liability on my 600cc Radian was more per month ($48/month) than full coverage on my little Ninja ($35/month). My insurance person was thought something was wrong for a second when my premium was lower for a 2015 bike compared to a 1986 bike.

 

[mrmarklin]

I have a curious question to ask:

If my bike is a 2009 speed triple..I am a weekend warrior who rides no more than 3-4 times a month for leisure, would full coverage be worth it? It adds on another 535$ a year for me (500$ deductible). Its expensive even though so far I dont have any claims, but I think it's because I am 28 and only been riding for 3 years. (through esurance)

Seasoned riders, what is your take? I am starting to feel since my bike is eventually depreciating anyways, but would like riders' experience and opinions.

Thanks

Your deductible is too low. You can significantly cut your cost by going to a $1k deductible. I have two bikes each more expensive than yours that cost me around $1,200 per year full coverage.

 

[Derb]

Not providing insurance information (in a hit-and-run) is the same to me as not having insurance information to provide, but maybe I'm just being crazy for thinking the default should be to assume the at-fault party has no insurance until it can be proven otherwise

Think about how many times people crash their car or motorcycle in a single car type crash and claim that it was a hit and run.

Also say in a multi car or motorcycle accident where you were at fault and you did maybe a little damage or no damage to their property, so the other party says no harm no foul and leaves the scene. Then you contact your insurance company and try and sell them a story that it was their fault and again they had no insurance info to provide. The insurance company wants proof of this. They want to know who this other party is and get a statement from them and verify who is really at fault. If a license plate number can be provided this will help your claim. Without some proof, you are screwed ( if it really was a hit n run ) and as far as physical damage to your property, you just rely on your own collision coverage, you just pay the deductible. This is why people try and lie and say it was a hit and run. Actually for two reasons, one, so they don't have to pay the deductible, and two so it is not an "at fault accident" which will affect your insurance premiums in the future.

I was at a stop sign years ago on a side street behind a tow truck that was at the front of the stop sign trying to turn left on a major street. He I guess felt he was sticking too far out in the main traffic and decided to back up and didn't see that I was behind him. I saw that this was happening and tried to shift into reverse as quickly as possible while honking and he backed into me and fucked my hood up good with his tow truck. I did not have collision coverage on my car so my only chance to get my car fixed was to rely on his insurance company. The tow truck operator acknowledged his mistake, gave me his insurance co info and we went on our way. I contact the insurance company and that is when I knew I was potentially fucked. The insurance company said that the driver said it was my fault and that I rear ended the tow truck! Fuck! I was so pissed, I was totally tricked by the driver. I went right back down to where it happened and luckily I got several people give me their names and phone numbers as witnesses, I provided this info to the insurance company and their insurance company was instantly on my side telling me that this tow truck company has pulled this crap so many times in the past! I got a check from them very quickly to pay for the damage.

 

[Derb]

I have a curious question to ask:

If my bike is a 2009 speed triple..I am a weekend warrior who rides no more than 3-4 times a month for leisure, would full coverage be worth it? It adds on another 535$ a year for me (500$ deductible). Its expensive even though so far I dont have any claims, but I think it's because I am 28 and only been riding for 3 years. (through esurance)

Seasoned riders, what is your take? I am starting to feel since my bike is eventually depreciating anyways, but would like riders' experience and opinions.

Thanks

To answer this question you would need to look at your Declarations page in your auto policy and look at the break down cost specifically for Comprehensive coverage and for Collision coverage.

For example for me personally I have chosen to carry Comprehensive coverage still even though my motorcycle is 20 years old ( I have a clean ass 96 Honda CBR600F3 ). Why do I do this? Because I am charged $11.78 over a 6 month period of time for the coverage based on a 100 deductible.

I don't bother with collision coverage for a couple of reasons. 1., it would not be a big financial loss if the bike was a total loss with having collision damage but more importantly, 2. if I were to say be involved in a single motorcycle accident I wouldn't want to report that to my insurance company because sure they will take care of the cost of the damage to the motorcycle minus my deductible (if I had the coverage ) but since I was the only person involved ( in this accident example ) it would be considered an "at fault accident" and my future premiums would reflect this ( they would go up ).

Also if you are like me and have a your motorcycle on your auto policy, when your insurance premium does go up ( due to an at fault accident ) it doesn't just reflect on the price breakdown on the motorcycle or vehicle you were using in the at fault accident, it will affect the highest potential risk, meaning you will notice all your liability costs increased on your main vehicle you drive as again the increase in premium is based on a possible future accident and it will be based on the highest possible risk and if that is the car the premium increases will show on the Declarations page breakdown on that vehicle.

This is not the case with a comprehensive type loss ( such as theft for example ). Comprehensive is otherwise known as "other than collision damage".

And to try and clarify more, the insurance company increases your premium when you are in an at fault accident based on statistics. Statistics show that if you are involved in an at fault accident, you are much more likely to be involved in another at fault accident in the near future. I know you want to believe it is to pay for that previous accident but not true, it is collect the appropriate premium based on the fact that you are a much greater risk to be involved in another one very shortly and maybe that last accident was minor but the next one could be a much greater liability exposure to the company.

So to really answer your question you take this into account.

What does YOUR Comprehensive coverage cost each 6 months or each year?

What does YOUR Collision coverage cost each 6 months or each year?

Take in the other factors that I mentioned ( usually comprehensive claims do not increase your insurance premium but at fault collision accidents will increase your insurance costs ).

My CBR is "vehicle 15" in the right hand column. It will show you the cost breakdown of all the different coverage stated in the far left hand column. Can't be more clear than this.