[InvisibleSoul]

I know this has been talked about in the past, but I thought I'd start a fresh discussion on this.

The basic insurance coverage includes $200K of Third Party Liability.

You can optionally extend this to $500K, $1M, $2M or even more.

How much coverage do you choose for your car insurance?

For those that get $2M or more, why do you feel this is necessary?

Do you have any friends or family members that has ever needed to use $1M or even $500K or $200K of the coverage?

I mean, to get sued for $1M in damages, I would think that you would have needed to kill at least one person with your vehicle... and you would have to be at fault too.

What's the likelihood of that actually happening?

[Supafly]

I know this has been talked about in the past, but I thought I'd start a fresh discussion on this.

The basic insurance coverage includes $200K of Third Party Liability.

You can optionally extend this to $500K, $1M, $2M or even more.

How much coverage do you choose for your car insurance?

For those that get $2M or more, why do you feel this is necessary?

Do you have any friends or family members that has ever needed to use $1M or even $500K or $200K of the coverage?

I mean, to get sued for $1M in damages, I would think that you would have needed to kill at least one person with your vehicle... and you would have to be at fault too.

What's the likelihood of that actually happening?


i usually opt for the most...in this day and age, there are really good lawyers out there and also very good actors/actresses. I would rather not risk it.
A simple head injury can yeild disasterous results if you dont have adequet coverage...Imagine a car full of injuries... 100K isn't hard to obtain now with neck/spinal/head injuries... i heard of some people hitting 200K+ for a head trauma.

[Blinky]

Likelihood of the event is low, but that's why the premium for the amount of coverage is quite low as well for amounts in excess of $200K. Whether you want to carry more than the $200k liability comes down to your personal risk tolerance. I think I carry $2M.

Incidentally, I think you're more likely to see a very large claim if you don't kill someone. Imagine ganking, but not killing, a 30 year old neurosurgeon such that they don't function too well and definitely can't practice. That's 30+ years of lost earnings and a whole host of other issues that your claim will be for... or how about ganking a minivan full of neurosurgeons on their way to a conference? :D

[ilvtofu]

I carry 2million or 3 i believe on my 300zx,
I don't know why I do lol, better safe than sorry?

[Edison_Chen]

Majority of clients that I deal with, usually have a minimum of a million, however most clients usually carry 2-3 million. Few people take 5 million, and few people take less than a million. It is like a bell curve (lots in the middle, few at both ends). For liability it isn't very much for a person with a reasonable discount.

It is true, better safe than sorry. This is insurance; nothing happens then nothing happens. But when something does happen, its there to protect you.

[InvisibleSoul]

I find it very strange, in that it seems like in general, everyone thinks they are good drivers... but yet, people are seemingly contradicting that by buying so much third party liability insurance. It's a contradiction because it would only ever be used if THEY were at fault for the accident.

This past year, I opted my coverage down to $500K. I simply don't believe I'll ever be responsible for an accident so serious that I'll be on the hook for more than a $500K settlement.

[alwaysideways]

You never know...thats the point of insurance. Ya ya were all amazing drivers. But shit happens...

Calculate the cost if you could for me of hitting a doctor and his nurse wife. Now they can work at their chosen professions. Whats the cost over 10 years. 20? how about 40? Oh wait forgot to mention it was their minivan with kids....their hurt too....

Add it up tell me what you think it COULD cost.....not what YOU would be responsible for.

Anything under 1 million is taunting danger....it'll never happen to me right? Ya thats also every drunks excuse to drive home after the bar. Plus the additional cost of that extra 500,000 is really not very much....niether is the little bit for 2 instead of 1 million.

Just my thoughts

[misteranswer]

I find it very strange, in that it seems like in general, everyone thinks they are good drivers... but yet, people are seemingly contradicting that by buying so much third party liability insurance. It's a contradiction because it would only ever be used if THEY were at fault for the accident.

This past year, I opted my coverage down to $500K. I simply don't believe I'll ever be responsible for an accident so serious that I'll be on the hook for more than a $500K settlement.

How much did you save?

[impactX]

How much did you save?

lol I can see where this is leading.

[impactX]

I find it very strange, in that it seems like in general, everyone thinks they are good drivers... but yet, people are seemingly contradicting that by buying so much third party liability insurance. It's a contradiction because it would only ever be used if THEY were at fault for the accident.

This past year, I opted my coverage down to $500K. I simply don't believe I'll ever be responsible for an accident so serious that I'll be on the hook for more than a $500K settlement.

Since it's a civil matter, you could be found partly at fault even if you don't think you are at fault at all. At where I am living, the manditory minimum amount of 3rd party death or bodily injury damage is ~CAD$14 million.

Is putting your future at risk worth saving a few bucks? If so, why not opt for the $200k coverage instead? As sad as it sounds, you can't pick and choose whom you're going to hit and you don't know what their professions are until you hit them. A medical doctor would easily make $100-200k a year, how long is your $500k coverage going to last?

[Volvo-brickster]

I find it very strange, in that it seems like in general, everyone thinks they are good drivers... but yet, people are seemingly contradicting that by buying so much third party liability insurance. It's a contradiction because it would only ever be used if THEY were at fault for the accident.



We are dealing with ICBC.

When doesn't ICBC find you at fault for anything ?

[InvisibleSoul]

How much did you save?

I dunno... $75? I need to renew my insurance in the next few weeks, so I'll make sure I get the exact differences in cost between $500K, $1M, $2M and maybe more.

Say the difference between $500K and $2M is $150.

If I drive for a span of 40 years, that's $6000. What do I think of the chances that I'll kill someone while driving in the 40 years and be at fault for it? Probably like 0.000001%.

Since it's a civil matter, you could be found partly at fault even if you don't think you are at fault at all. At where I am living, the manditory minimum amount of 3rd party death or bodily injury damage is ~CAD$14 million.
So what is the figure for Vancouver? Keyword is "could".

Is putting your future at risk worth saving a few bucks? If so, why not opt for the $200k coverage instead? As sad as it sounds, you can't pick and choose whom you're going to hit and you don't know what their professions are until you hit them. A medical doctor would easily make $100-200k a year, how long is your $500k coverage going to last?
I don't believe it's putting my future at risk, when the chances of it happening are about as good as me winning the lottery.

1) First of all, I'd have to actually get in an accident.
2) Secondly, I'd have to be at fault for the accident.
3) The accident would have to be severe enough for someone to die or permanently injured
4) The person who died or is permanently injured is a high paying professional

Considering I've never been in any major accident, nevermind one that is my fault in the 12+ years I've been driving, I think the chances of having all four happening are incredibly low.

Once again, who here even knows of anyone who has ever been in a situation where they have been liable for $1M?

[InvisibleSoul]

Anything under 1 million is taunting danger....

Is it? Is it REALLY? I sure don't believe so. Maybe for someone that tends to drive recklessly and/or carelessly...

it'll never happen to me right? Ya thats also every drunks excuse to drive home after the bar.
That's a pretty crappy example. They may think the same way, but it's the reality of the situation that counts. If you're driving drunk, obviously the chances of getting into an accident increase exponentially. But to be at fault for a serious accident that kills someone? Incredibly low odds of that happening.

Plus the additional cost of that extra 500,000 is really not very much....niether is the little bit for 2 instead of 1 million.
And the little bit for $3M instead of $2M. And the little bit for $4M instead of $3M. And the little bit for $5M instead of $4M.

Heck, everyone should get $100M of Third Party Liability! Who knows... you might just happen to run over Jimmy Pattison.

[koukimonst3r]

I've got 3million, I think that's the max.

[InvisibleSoul]

I've got 3million, I think that's the max.
No, I just looked it up and the max is $5M.

[impactX]

I don't think you need to persuade anyone though. If you are happy with $500k coverage, then $500k is all you need. But for those of us who will never win the lottery while we are bound to hit the jackpot of shit with the luck that we have, we'd rather pay a little more for peace of mind.

You can be driving safe for 99.9% of the time with no chance of any major accidents happening caused by you; but it only takes that 0.1% of lapse in concentration to put you in debt for the rest of your life. If you are sure that you can pay full attention to the driving condition 100% of the time, be it after 4-5 hours of sleep or after 10 hours of work, then yeah, you probably don't even need $500k coverage.

[Blinky]

Once again, who here even knows of anyone who has ever been in a situation where they have been liable for $1M?

I'm not sure that this is "possible" because an injury claim would be transparent to the person at-fault. As the insured, you transfer your monetary risk, up to policy limit, to ICBC. If you carry $5M liability you'll probably never know what the payout to that doctor was.

It all comes down to personal risk tolerance.

[dai3yuen]

^agreed. If you're comfortable with $500,000 then all the more power to you.

Don't forget that TPL doesn't just cover bodily injury. It covers any damage caused in an accident (i.e. hit a power pole that causes feedback to 'X' amount of city blocks and fries a lot of electronics, BC Hydro will be looking at ICBC to pay for that).

Just hope that you do not injure anyone in a specific area that they rely on for their everyday work (i.e. you T-Bone a neural surgeon and their hand is crushed in the accident. ICBC would possibly have to pay out for future earnings if the surgeon is no longer able to do what he used to.)

[InvisibleSoul]

I don't think you need to persuade anyone though. If you are happy with $500k coverage, then $500k is all you need. But for those of us who will never win the lottery while we are bound to hit the jackpot of shit with the luck that we have, we'd rather pay a little more for peace of mind.

You can be driving safe for 99.9% of the time with no chance of any major accidents happening caused by you; but it only takes that 0.1% of lapse in concentration to put you in debt for the rest of your life. If you are sure that you can pay full attention to the driving condition 100% of the time, be it after 4-5 hours of sleep or after 10 hours of work, then yeah, you probably don't even need $500k coverage.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not actually trying to persuade anyone here to go out and reduce their coverage... but what I am doing is trying to provide reasonable arguments as to whether it really is actually necessary to have $2M or even $1M coverage.

It's hard to express the exact feeling, but to me it's almost like an urban myth that people SHOULD have at least $1M coverage. I mean, how did this belief come to be accepted as the standard? Is it because every insurance agent says so? Is it because of people's inherent fear of causing an accident, or feel they are risking their life financially by not getting it?

[impactX]

I think it would be the risk factor associated with driving. Everytime you drive, there's a certain degree of risk to it and (some/most) people do not want to transform the driving risk to financial risk.

Well, just for discussion sake, my friend works for his dad who's a lawyer that fights ICBC cases. I don't remember the details as the conversation was from a couple years ago already, I briefly remember that my friend was looking at a case where the payout of the claim was more than a couple million dollars.

[goo3]

You probably won't ever need it that high.

But sometimes it's smart to protect against the disaster scenario that can wipe someone out unexpectedly.

Like if you have lots of dependents, maybe it's worth it to get life insurance.

You could put all your money in GE. They'll be around 50 yrs from now, guaranteed. But no one's gonna do that, just in case.

[rice cooker]

are u guys fucking serious?

i have the basic 200k. i'm not gonna have any at fault accidents anytime soon and def not gonna kill anyone. icbc's a joke and i'm not gonna give them anymore money than i have to

[ilvtofu]

^LOL he's actually got a point, quick question, would it be cheaper to buy the cheapest basic insurance from icbc then go to a third party insurance company for the extras?

[Wetordry]

5 MILLION

worst case scenario:

if you hit a minivan full of aspiring doctors, they dont die, but lay bedridden in the hospital for life = that will easily put you to over 10 million


Difference between 3 to 5 million coverage: $150 or so


To the RS'ers that actually have assets: stick with 3 million+. ALL can be taken away just like that & force you into bankruptcy
To the others: 200k is ok, you go bankrupt, 7 yrs and you can be financially free!


Simple advice: Ask your lawyer what he or she bought on their own vehicle!

[Mugen EvOlutioN]

are u guys fucking serious?

i have the basic 200k. i'm not gonna have any at fault accidents anytime soon and def not gonna kill anyone. icbc's a joke and i'm not gonna give them anymore money than i have to

lol i like your thinking


get some BBK, and super sticky tires. Than you should be fine unless u are fucking drunk
with that setup and some semi common sense i doubt anyone on this board can cause over 1 mill damage

[taylor192]

are u guys fucking serious?

i have the basic 200k. i'm not gonna have any at fault accidents anytime soon and def not gonna kill anyone. icbc's a joke and i'm not gonna give them anymore money than i have to

OK hero.:Orly:

[taylor192]

^LOL he's actually got a point, quick question, would it be cheaper to buy the cheapest basic insurance from icbc then go to a third party insurance company for the extras?

Yes. Its always cheaper unless you're a terrible driver.

[taylor192]

I have $1M of liability. I consider that I rarely drive > 80kmph, and most of the time are on 60 kmph streets in metro Van, so the chances of a terrible accidents are greatly reduced, more likely to have a fender bender.

In the end its all a gamble. If you're comfortable gambling on $200K or wasting more money to have $5M then go ahead, its your money and your life. I sleep fine knowing I have $1M.

That said, I don't have collision or comprehensive either and still sleep fine. I didn't want to pay another $800 for coverage. Its a gamble, yet an educated gamble. Every year I save $800, every year my car depreciates more. Within ~5 years I hit a breaking point where I've saved about the cost of replacing the vehicle. If I have an at-fault accident or vandalism/theft during those 5 years, I gambled and lost.

[Mugen EvOlutioN]

life is all about gambling

[hk20000]

LOL 2mil here.

I thought that's pretty average. Remember that guy that drove his car into gas station in Burnaby? Probably 2mil worth of gasoline right there lol.

[InvisibleSoul]

5 MILLION

worst case scenario:

if you hit a minivan full of aspiring doctors, they dont die, but lay bedridden in the hospital for life = that will easily put you to over 10 million
So even if you have $5M coverage, you're screwed anyway!

It's hard to express the exact feeling, but to me it's almost like an urban myth that people SHOULD have at least $1M coverage. I mean, how did this belief come to be accepted as the standard? Is it because every insurance agent says so? Is it because of people's inherent fear of causing an accident, or feel they are risking their life financially by not getting it?
I'm actually REALLY curious about this... I wish there was a study done about this with some real facts and figures... because pretty much EVERYTHING that's been said here has been conjecture.

[InvisibleSoul]

I'm not sure that this is "possible" because an injury claim would be transparent to the person at-fault. As the insured, you transfer your monetary risk, up to policy limit, to ICBC. If you carry $5M liability you'll probably never know what the payout to that doctor was.
I hear what you're saying.

But how about this then? How many people do you know that has been at fault for killing or maiming someone with their vehicle, and a high paying professional at that?

[InvisibleSoul]

I have $1M of liability. I consider that I rarely drive > 80kmph, and most of the time are on 60 kmph streets in metro Van, so the chances of a terrible accidents are greatly reduced, more likely to have a fender bender.

In the end its all a gamble. If you're comfortable gambling on $200K or wasting more money to have $5M then go ahead, its your money and your life. I sleep fine knowing I have $1M.

That said, I don't have collision or comprehensive either and still sleep fine. I didn't want to pay another $800 for coverage. Its a gamble, yet an educated gamble. Every year I save $800, every year my car depreciates more. Within ~5 years I hit a breaking point where I've saved about the cost of replacing the vehicle. If I have an at-fault accident or vandalism/theft during those 5 years, I gambled and lost.
That's quite interesting, actually. You're willing to take the higher variance gamble, but opt out of the lower variance gamble.

What I mean is the odds that you would actually need the $1M third party liability is very low, but the odds that you might need the comprehensive or collision coverage is significantly higher... but the cost difference between the two reflect this.

I totally understand what you're saying though. The cheaper your car is, the easier it is to take this risk.

I mean, if you're driving a rust bucket that is worth $500, but the collision or comprehensive costs $600 a year, obviously it makes no sense to buy the coverage.

For me with my 2006 Yaris, the cost for collision coverage is $476, and that's with a $500 deductible. If the cost difference between the $300 and $500 deductible is $50, then I would be ahead if I get into an at-fault accident less than once every four years.

But for me, I would not opt out of collision or comprehensive, because for collision, even if the accident was a result of someone else doing something stupid, many times ICBC would still try to split the fault. And for comprehensive, obviously can't control whether someone steals or vandalizes your car or not...

[taylor192]

That's quite interesting, actually. You're willing to take the higher variance gamble, but opt out of the lower variance gamble.
That's not the way I look at it.

The gamble I take progressive gets less risky as the car is worth less, while liability only gets more risky as people earn more.

But for me, I would not opt out of collision or comprehensive, because for collision, even if the accident was a result of someone else doing something stupid, many times ICBC would still try to split the fault.
The insurance agent warned me of this. Here's why I'm not worried:

You only have to pay the XX% you are at fault for. I consider myself a good driver, so I'm comfortable with the gamble. If someone hits me, there is a good change 100% or 75% of my repairs will be paid for. If I hit someone else, well I suck and I gambled and lost.

Plus you can challenge insurance rulings (or at least you could in Ontario) to determine who is at fault.

And for comprehensive, obviously can't control whether someone steals or vandalizes your car or not...
Lets look at what comprehensive covers:

Theft.. MBs are very hard to steal (infrared key), and not often stolen for parts.
Vandalism doesn't worry me as I live in Kits.
Earthquakes... well I haven't felt one yet.
Floods... well I park ontop of a hill, very unlikely.
Animals... hopefully I don't hit one of the coons or strays in Kits.
Hail... haven't seen any yet.
Riots... I won't drive downtown if the Canucks win in the playoffs.
Fire... I like fire :)

Not worth it to me. I actually joked with my insusrance agent that the only reason I'd get comprehensive is to key my entire car and get a new paint job. He didn't laugh :haha:

[Blinky]

I hear what you're saying.

But how about this then? How many people do you know that has been at fault for killing or maiming someone with their vehicle, and a high paying professional at that?

None.

Given the relative ratio of the premium vs coverage you would probably expect "nobody" to know "anyone" who was in such a situation. (v. low likelihood, high consequence)

If one person replied on this thread knowing someone found liable, it would probably distort the numbers heavily the other way.

All this said, I do know one man locally -- a car guy -- who apparently received a large ICBC settlement for injuries sustained in a crash. He's not young (maybe in his 50s) but I would think that his payout exceeded $200k. You can tell speaking to him that he's not quite right. AFAIK he can't work and his settlement is such that he doesn't have to.

[heleu]

I have $5 million in third party liability.

...but my work pays for my insurance.

ICBC is going to offer 5 million for the same reason rental car companies offer insurance. Even though everyone has a travel VISA that covers their rental car insurance, the business travelers will always opt for coverage just because its less of a hassle and they don't have to pay for it.

[InvisibleSoul]

None.

Given the relative ratio of the premium vs coverage you would probably expect "nobody" to know "anyone" who was in such a situation. (v. low likelihood, high consequence)

If one person replied on this thread knowing someone found liable, it would probably distort the numbers heavily the other way.
Yeah... let's say on average it costs $75 to increase from the basic $200K to $500K.

Going by that, ICBC has calculated that the chances of someone needing the extra $300K is no less than 1 in 4000. Given that ICBC would give themselves a profit margin, it's probably significantly even more than 1 in 4000.

[jlenko]

Not saying that I'm invincible here... but I haven't caused any at-fault accidents and no one's ever gotten hurt as a result of my driving (aside from a few assholes who had to slow down behind me, maybe their feelings got hurt..?).

I have the minimum coverage.

Plus, I'm broke. Let's face it, I drive a Cavalier for a reason. If I end up somehow killing someone.. or seriously injuring them... they can sue me for whatever they want, I won't have the money to pay it so fuck them. ICBC will pay it out regardless.

[10W-30]

Insurance is for a peace of mind. Everyone has different tolerances/exposures to risk so it's not really comparing apples to apples anyways.

[trd2343]

Bumping up an old thread.

I need to renew my insurance soon, and it has come to my attention that I never questioned why I am paying for $3,000,000 third party liability or $500 for deductible.

As someone mentioned, the scenario is different for everyone, but I was wondering if anyone can share their advice on what things they consider when they made their decisions.

[meme405]

Bumping up an old thread.

I need to renew my insurance soon, and it has come to my attention that I never questioned why I am paying for $3,000,000 third party liability or $500 for deductible.

As someone mentioned, the scenario is different for everyone, but I was wondering if anyone can share their advice on what things they consider when they made their decisions.

I have 1 million liability on my personal vehicle. It costs very little to bump it to there from the basic package, and I feel that is a good amount. If I get into an accident which costs more than that, and I am at fault, I hope I just die as well...lol

On my company truck I have to carry 5mil, and that's simply to do with the requirement for some of the sites, and companies I work for. Their requirements dictate what I need to carry.

As for deductible, I have mine at $1000. Reason being that anything less than that I would obviously fix myself, and anything around that level I would likely choose to repair out of pocket instead of going through ICBC. In the end it comes down to your vehicle. My FX at this point is so far from a stock car, that I am likely fucked if I ever do get into an accident, as most shops wouldn't touch the thing. So reasonably I could probably bump my deductible to $3000, and not have a worry.

[trollguy]

Just consider the loss wages, general damages, future care, future wage loss, special damages of the other party involved in an accident you may be liable for. :)

[white rocket]

This thread is hilarious. From 2009 but still......"I'm only taking 200k PL & PD 'cause I ain't crashing anytime soon" Haha! I'm not planning on a fucking flood at my house happening anytime soon but I'm covered for it. No one is planning on mowing over a bunch of doctors in a crosswalk but shit happens. That's what insurance is for.

Common is 1 mill. Lawsuits far exceed what ICBC allows for though. People sue for insane amounts and win so it's best to have at least 2 mill but 5 would be safe.

As for deductibles, $300 or $500 is common but you can take a higher one to save some money. Depends on what you are driving I guess.

[Mikoyan]

Common is 1 mill. Lawsuits far exceed what ICBC allows for though. People sue for insane amounts and win so it's best to have at least 2 mill but 5 would be safe.
.

This.

A relative of mine was in an accident where they was going straight through the intersection with the green, and the oncoming driver made a left turn into them, and there are witnesses supporting this. The other driver is still suing them claiming that they ran a red, and that she had an advance left turn light.

ICBC thinks it's BS too, but it sounds like she hired a lawyer right from the start and is refusing to talk to ICBC about anything. Also, a court records search seems to indicate that she's done this for her previous accidents.

The gamble the other driver's doing, from my understanding, is to get some % of blame assigned away from her, and get some kind of settlement or finding through the court. She's claiming all sorts of stuff. Going light on details as it's still before the courts now.

Chances are that she doesn't have a case at all, so it'll be ok. But lets say you were in a case where you were right, but you have no dashcam, no witnesses, and the other driver lies to the ICBC/court and wins/believed. I wouldn't risk that.

I carry 2 million myself.

[Alby]

This thread is hilarious. From 2009 but still......"I'm only taking 200k PL & PD 'cause I ain't crashing anytime soon" Haha! I'm not planning on a fucking flood at my house happening anytime soon but I'm covered for it. No one is planning on mowing over a bunch of doctors in a crosswalk but shit happens. That's what insurance is for.

Common is 1 mill. Lawsuits far exceed what ICBC allows for though. People sue for insane amounts and win so it's best to have at least 2 mill but 5 would be safe.

As for deductibles, $300 or $500 is common but you can take a higher one to save some money. Depends on what you are driving I guess.

this is interesting as i have never thought or entertained the idea of upping my deductible to save some money. for arguments sake, say an average driver that has a civic/corolla/mazda3 etc, how much more money do you save when you increase your deductible?

[SoNaRWaVe]

i save about 80-120 bucks if i bump my deductible from 300 to 500. i drive a nissan versa.

[RevYouUp]

I'm curious. How many people here that have more than the basic 200k 3rd party liability buy other insurances as well? Life insurance, health insurance , etc..

I mean the likely hood of you killing someone like a doctor while being at fault; if you're a good driver is almost saying that you might get struck by lightning or die from getting stabbed while getting groceries or something.

[hud 91gt]

If you honestly think you will never be at fault for an accident. Sadly, you are probably the one who needs it most.

You are a human. You make mistakes.

I for one go for 2million, I just renewed and was going to go for 3. In a lawsuit, it doesn't take much for someone to sue for a few million. FYI, no to life insurance, I don't have any debt nor SO's/Children to take car of. I have rental insurance, as I live in a building with a bunch of university students, and who knows when their Kraft dinner will burn down this 60 year old wood building and my belongings with it.

To save a few bucks I was going to opt for a $500 deductible instead. Chances are small that I will be in an accident, so I don't mind the few dollars extra if I need to claim for a windshield or accident. But I'd much rather be out a few bucks, then be debt ridden for the prime years of my life if the unexpected were to happen.

[Tone Loc]

I'm sitting at $2 million myself, when I renew I'll probably go for $5 million as I drive more and more each year due to work/school/life/family responsibilities.

A lot of my friends say even $2 million is excessive, but IMO "shit happens" with life, the whole point of insurance as a whole is to cover your ass if something bad DOES happen so in my mind I might as well max out my coverage since the cost difference is equivalent to a couple of tanks of gas a year...

Plus, there are plenty of shitty people with good lawyers who, if involved in an accident, are "out to get you" and will do anything, even lie and/or commit fraud to screw you over. Always best to cover your ass lol.

EDIT: Just saw Mikoyan's post above. Perfect example of said 'shitty people' who, with their lawyers, are the reason I will be bumping my coverage to 5 mil.

[nabs]

2mil/300 deductible. But its interesting to know that I can go for a higher deductible and pay less.

[ChaKo]

I'm curious. How many people here that have more than the basic 200k 3rd party liability buy other insurances as well? Life insurance, health insurance , etc..

I mean the likely hood of you killing someone like a doctor while being at fault; if you're a good driver is almost saying that you might get struck by lightning or die from getting stabbed while getting groceries or something.

why are so many people hung up on this doctor thing? you don't have to hit a doctor to be held liable for a substantial amount of money. this is a case of a 50 year old bus driver that was awarded nearly six million dollars in damages:
2007 BCSC 993 Aberdeen v. Township of Langley (http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/sc/07/09/2007bcsc0993.htm)

the driver was only partially at fault there, but the point is you can hit just about anyone (he didn't even hit the guy) and still exceed the basic 200,000 many times over. nowadays, there are some cars that exceed 200,000 in value.

you never know when you might be involved in an accident. that's why they are called accidents. as others have mentioned, these options are available so you can choose what you're comfortable with, unless you're comfortable with less than 200,000. in my case, a 200 dollar difference in premium on an annual basis is really not going to be noticed; whereas, a million dollar lawsuit will probably end up with me losing my home. it would suck to lose your home over 200 bucks.

[trd2343]

What everyone has posted thus far is points I'm kind of curious about. I agree with everyone that even for someone who drives really safe, there's always the risk of you getting into an accident that you're at fault.

I notice that many people use what they are comfortable with to determine how much insurance they need. It might work for some, but I find it a little bit vague.

Would the amount of hours that you drive each day/week/month be a useful factor to consider when deciding how much insurance you need? Say for example, if you are on the road 1 hour each day, you should get $2 mil, but if you are on the road 9 hours each day, you should get $5 mil.

[nabs]

What everyone has posted thus far is points I'm kind of curious about. I agree with everyone that even for someone who drives really safe, there's always the risk of you getting into an accident that you're at fault.

I notice that many people use what they are comfortable with to determine how much insurance they need. It might work for some, but I find it a little bit vague.

Would the amount of hours that you drive each day/week/month be a useful factor to consider when deciding how much insurance you need? Say for example, if you are on the road 1 hour each day, you should get $2 mil, but if you are on the road 9 hours each day, you should get $5 mil.

I see it as the opposite, the longer you are on the road daily the more in tune you are with the road conditions and such, and you are less likely to be in a rush because you would have a route or such. People who take shorter trips/commutes always try to find ways to make their commutes shorter, thus are less attentive to whats going on around them ( i would assume ) so more likely to get into an accident.

If you would like to use that as a metric for determining it, then its your choice, it is whatever you are comfortable with but you have to cover your ass all the time.

[CCA-Dave]

are u guys fucking serious?

i have the basic 200k. i'm not gonna have any at fault accidents anytime soon and def not gonna kill anyone. icbc's a joke and i'm not gonna give them anymore money than i have to

Wow, I'm honestly surprised how many people have already said this in the thread...scary people think this way. I've _seen_ the cars at Vancouver meets, and know there are a million ways from Sunday a good lawyer can find a person at fault for at least some portion of an accident.

I have coached high performance driving, I've raced multiple disciplines, and driven professionally for a wide variety of purposes. While I too believe I am not likely to cause an at-fault accident, I'm smart enough to know there is a reason they are called "accidents". If you can honestly tell me you've never, in your entire career of driving, had:

a close call
gotten to your destination and realized you don't remember part of the drive
driven while tired AND/OR
read a map, your phone, a billboard, advertisement or checked out the hottie on the corner

Then you've either never driven a vehicle, or you're lying.

For my own vehicles, I rate my 3rd party liability coverage based on the vehicle and what I use it for.

The rally bug has 3mil coverage, and I'm considering extending it to 5mil...simply for the fact that even I am parked and some idiot hits me, I guarantee you I will be on the defensive due to driving a car with "racing decals". So, in any case where I'm moving and accident happens, I fully expect that I'll need to be defending my driving, and cover appropriately.

The pickup truck has 3mil coverage, because I use it for mountain biking and towing project cars. You never know what bikers are going to do on the mountain, and it's certainly possible one will pop out of a trail just as I'm coming around the corner. Towing project cars occasionally creates great adventures and stories, but also increased insurance risk. I've towed through hurricanes on the east coast, and heavy snow in the mountains...it's amazing how quickly things can change behind the wheel.

My '68 VW single cab, and now the '58 Beetle, carry 2mil coverage...based on the use of the '68 as an around-town, very little highway, pleasure vehicle and the '58 will be the same. Besides, chances are if I'm in a serious enough accident that I'm looking at paying out more than 2mil, the victim is suing my estate. Google crash photos of classic Volkswagens if you don't want to sleep tonight. In anything more than a light in-town fender-bender, I'm going to be going six-feet under, not onto RS that night to tell my tale.

Insurance is one of those things that sucks to pay for, right up until the moment you need it. That's the moment you want to have more of it than you need.

-D

[Mikoyan]

I'm sitting at $2 million myself, when I renew I'll probably go for $5 million as I drive more and more each year due to work/school/life/family responsibilities.

A lot of my friends say even $2 million is excessive, but IMO "shit happens" with life, the whole point of insurance as a whole is to cover your ass if something bad DOES happen so in my mind I might as well max out my coverage since the cost difference is equivalent to a couple of tanks of gas a year...

Plus, there are plenty of shitty people with good lawyers who, if involved in an accident, are "out to get you" and will do anything, even lie and/or commit fraud to screw you over. Always best to cover your ass lol.

EDIT: Just saw Mikoyan's post above. Perfect example of said 'shitty people' who, with their lawyers, are the reason I will be bumping my coverage to 5 mil.

Yup, ICBC says the other driver is 100% at fault, but she's still suing. As a result, ICBC has to retain a lawyer to defend my relative, have them rack up the billable hours, possibly get dragged out for years, and maybe go to court.

Part of the reason why rates keep going up.

I see it as the opposite, the longer you are on the road daily the more in tune you are with the road conditions and such, and you are less likely to be in a rush because you would have a route or such. People who take shorter trips/commutes always try to find ways to make their commutes shorter, thus are less attentive to whats going on around them ( i would assume ) so more likely to get into an accident.

If you would like to use that as a metric for determining it, then its your choice, it is whatever you are comfortable with but you have to cover your ass all the time.

That only controls your behavior. I'm more line with reamemiya's train of thought. The longer you're on the road, the longer you're exposed to the risks associated with driving. You're right that being out out there longer makes it a less rushed drive for you, but it puts you at risk from other drivers for a longer time. ie. Your drive to work is 15 mins, you leave 15 minutes early rather than 5, so you don't rush. You're exposed to the road hazards for 30 minutes rather than 20.

[multicartual]

Fuck disconnected my ABS just for pedal feel


I always ask for 0 third party but they make me take 200k

[68style]

Haha yah don't skimp on the third party just because people are assholes. I had a guy drive his Civic on the wrong side of the road and hit me head on in my MR2 Turbo me 2 years later he tried to sue me to get me blamed saying my car was faulty etc because he couldn't claim any injuries since he was at fault. Such an asshole.

I had to go to court and everything, it was ridiculous given the circumstances and witnesses but his lawyer wouldnt budge, it took the judge all of 10 seconds to decide it was bullshit and tell the lawyer off but all the mental trauma and thinking there was some small chance it could go wrong and he was suing for everything saying the accident made him fat (he was already fat at the accident scene) and he couldn't work etc... His car was actually okay mine got totalled+airbag went off and I wasn't even hurt and never claimed anything!

Such a fucker and such a scumbag lawyer for taking a ridiculous case trying to get paid out with their liar client. After the court decision a month later before Christmas, I sent him a Christmas card wishing him a merry Christmas (sarcastically) and advising him he could always use his supposedly newfound weight to find work as a Santa at the fucking mall.

[Soundy]

Wow, I'm honestly surprised how many people have already said this in the thread...scary people think this way. I've _seen_ the cars at Vancouver meets, and know there are a million ways from Sunday a good lawyer can find a person at fault for at least some portion of an accident.
Sure you were just sitting there at a stale red and the guy plowed into your rear end because he was texting and not paying attention... but it's still your fault for leaving home in the first place. If you'd just stayed in the kitchen where you belong, the accident would have never happened!

[jdmfemme]

$5 million liabilty on all vehicles in the household for peace of mind. It's an extra $12/month over $2 million but worth it I believe. Also, Excess underinsured motorist protection to protect myself from you $200,000 and no insurance people. :)

[CCA-Dave]

Also, Excess underinsured motorist protection to protect myself from you $200,000 and no insurance people. :)

:thumbsup:

This thread is making me think about upping my excess underinsured :P

[trollguy]

peace of mind. not sure how you find that strange

[white rocket]

Good drivers make mistakes too. Look away for a second and the vehicle in front slams on their brakes. BAM! 100% your fault. You never know what's going to happen so why not protect yourself?

[smoothie.]

Good drivers make mistakes too. Look away for a second and the vehicle in front slams on their brakes. BAM! 100% your fault. You never know what's going to happen so why not protect yourself?

a good driver would have left enough room to not be 4 feet into the car infront if they looked away for a second.

That said, I have 2 million, just because I can't afford not buying it.

[trollguy]

What you're describing is a perfect driver, smoothie.

good drivers are exactly that. good, but not perfect.

[Ulic Qel-Droma]

maximum liability. always.

given enough time, an accident will happen.

1 million is NOTHING. don't be fools. always get maximum liability unless you're a second rate poor ass citizen that has to choose between the next few meals or a slightly higher premium.

millions are not excessive when it comes to the medical and legal side of this argument.

if you cause any permanent bodily damage, they will be awarded a minimum of 1 million dollars.

just think about that.

risk mitigation, risk control. whatever you want to call it. the cost is nothing. NOTHING. you shouldn't even bat an eye at the extra premium.

1000 dollar deductible for me.

i know two people awarded 1 million because they suffered permanent bodily damage.

i had a woman sue me cuz i hit her going 10km/h, 9 people involved. only she complaint. she said her neck hurt and had to miss work. she chased hard and sued back, and eventually icbc awarded her 75,000 dollars.

75,000 dollars just for a sore neck and missing work (all bullshit of course). you think about what 200k can cover if its even slightly serious.

5 million bros. 5 mill. if they had 10, i'd do 10 for sure.

[trd2343]

^Out of curiosity then, at what amount would you consider excessive?

[meme405]

I actually had to re-new my insurance just last weekend, and I reviewed my coverage for my FX, and as it turns out I carry 2 mil liability.

I didn't ask what the price difference was between 1mil and 2mil, I just left it where it was.

[Ulic Qel-Droma]

^Out of curiosity then, at what amount would you consider excessive?

i can't answer that because i don't have all the information.

lol i would give the information to a statistician. bell curve or something and 4 standard deviations away. lol or something...

i dont know. i would see what the highest lawsuit that went through was, and then that would be it. the cost shouldn't be that much more than 5 million.

but 5 million isn't excessive. i've heard of 9 million dollar accident lawsuits.

[white rocket]

Death is cheap, permanent disability is not. Hate to sound morbid but that's the truth.

5 mill is the max for a normal person although ICBC does offer 10 mill and 25 mill but I believe those are for passenger vehicles like limos, buses, etc.

[CCA-Dave]

So I was in the insurance office renewing the insurance on the 1958 Beetle. I don't have collector plates on it yet, as it's still a project car. So for the sake of this discussion it's still a "normal" car...just old. I currently have 2mil liability on it, and just for fun asked what the price difference was between 1mil and 2mil liability.

$30.00

PER YEAR

That's right, per year. So now I REALLY don't understand you guys who think you're saving so much money by not having good liability coverage. You probably spent more money in liquor and dinner last weekend then your liability insurance will cost you in a year. Hell, that $30 is a tank of gas in the '58.

-Dave

[Mancini]

are u guys fucking serious?

i have the basic 200k. i'm not gonna have any at fault accidents anytime soon and def not gonna kill anyone. icbc's a joke and i'm not gonna give them anymore money than i have to

And yet if your tire blows and it results in an accident you will be the party at fault. Good luck with that.

[Mikoyan]

millions are not excessive when it comes to the medical and legal side of this argument.

if you cause any permanent bodily damage, they will be awarded a minimum of 1 million dollars.

just think about that.

risk mitigation, risk control. whatever you want to call it. the cost is nothing. NOTHING. you shouldn't even bat an eye at the extra premium.

i know two people awarded 1 million because they suffered permanent bodily damage.

i had a woman sue me cuz i hit her going 10km/h, 9 people involved. only she complaint. she said her neck hurt and had to miss work. she chased hard and sued back, and eventually icbc awarded her 75,000 dollars.


The other thing in this discussion I think everyone lost sight of was multiple passengers. We've all just talked about a single driver incident. Look at Ulic's case. If all 9 people had sued, and ICBC awarded $75k each, it totals $675,000.