Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Cars & TransportationInsurance & Registration · 6 months ago

Which insurance coverage would you rather get?

A) Liability only: $15,000/$30,000/$5000 for $500/6 months

B) Full coverage: $50,000/$100,000/$20,000 and Collision/Comp with $1000 deductibles for $600/6 months

14 Answers

Relevance
  • 6 months ago

    Full coverage at this time because you never know you could get hit when you are home sleeping in bed.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • lucy
    Lv 7
    6 months ago

    Let me explain what coverage you are choosing.

    $15,000/$30,000/$5,000 is the minimum limits in your state. Now the 1st (2) numbers are for injuries you cause if found at fault in an accident. So in A case, the MAX your policy would pay is $15,000 (per) person and the MAX it will pay for (2) or more people injured is $30,000. The last number $5,000 is for property damages, which in most cases is an auto/truck, but could also be other property damages like hitting a sign, fence etc.

    Now you are in an accident and found at fault. The other car has $8,000 damages and there is a driver/passenger who is injured, goes to the ER and has surgery and the total hospital bill is $40,000. But they came home and also need rehab treatment, thus another $8,000, totaling $48,000 in medical bills.

    Your insurance pays them $5,000 for the car damages. They also pay the injured driver $15,000, since that is the max that you bought. $48,000 - $15,000 = $33,000. $8,000 - $5,000 = $3,000. Now since you bought the minimum (legal) limits, then they go after you/sue for the difference of $36,000.

    I have always had $100,000/$300,000/$100,000 until I handled auto claims and saw too many times when there was not enough coverage, thus I increased my limits to $250,000/$500,000/$250,000 (plus) a umbrella policy that covers me to 1 million. What surprised me was that by increasing the limits only cost me about $20 more?

    So for $100 more, you would get (almost) double in liability, (plus) adding collision/comprehensive to cover (your) own car damages. But like many others have stated, I bet if you got $100,000/$300,000/$50,000 or $100,000 property damages then the cost might be $30.00 or $50.00 more for the increase.

    The question is, would you rather pay a couple hundred less, but then take the chance of being sued if not enough?

    Source(s): retired auto adjuster
    • car253
      Lv 7
      6 months agoReport

      Great answer. But this really needs to be explained by a sit down insurance agent one on one. Hard to explain in auto answers. But it is a great answer.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • May
    Lv 5
    6 months ago

    The liability limits you describe are way, way too low. If you choose liability only I suggest at least 100/300/100.

    I would choose the latter coverage. Just one thing: There is no such thing as "full coverage". That term has been meaningless for the last 30 years. The coverage's you choose for insurance should be chosen based on your financial situation and your "risk tolerance".

    RISK VS REWARD

    • Login to reply the answers
  • JetDoc
    Lv 7
    6 months ago

    $15,000 liability is an IDIOT'S choice! Lets say you are found "at fault" for an accident that totals someone's brand new BMW or Mercedes... DO THE MATH! The car is worth $65,000 and your insurance company is only required to pay $15,000. Guess who is responsible to pay the rest?

    I carry $100,000/$300,000/$100,000 full coverage with a $500 deductible on all my cars. It costs me about $800 every six months for THREE cars.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • lj1
    Lv 7
    6 months ago

    Of the two choices you gave, I would choose B. It's surprisingly easy to exceed the coverage limits in group A, and then you're on the hook for the rest. If you do $20,000 of damage, and your liability limit is $15,000, you would have to pay the remaining $5,000 out of your own pocket. $50,000 really isn't enough, but it's much better than $15,000.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    6 months ago

    B is for Bargain! Full coverage is DOUBLE the liability coverage for me!

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 6 months ago

    Which would I "rather" get:

    Neither.... if cost is no object, I'd rather have full coverage with $300K coverage with a $250 deductible.

    • ...Show all comments
    • A Hunch
      Lv 7
      6 months agoReport

      Of course, there isn't but I don't need to sit here and write you need liability, collision, comprehension, uninsured/underinsured motorist, rental car coverage, etc

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    6 months ago

    The full coverage.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 6 months ago

    I would buy the full coverage.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    6 months ago

    Depends on the car. For an old used car then liability insurance. On a new car i would definitely get full coverage.

    • car253
      Lv 7
      6 months agoReport

      Coverage depends on the value of the car, not if it is old or new.

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.