OK hero.:Orly:

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

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.

life is all about gambling

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.

So even if you have $5M coverage, you're screwed anyway!

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.

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?

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...

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.

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.

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:

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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. :)

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.

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.

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?

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

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.

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.

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.

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