Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > Property - Casualty / General Insurance
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

2017 ACTUARIAL SALARY SURVEYS
Contact DW Simpson for a Personalized Salary Survey

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-07-2018, 11:38 AM
Just Annoyed Just Annoyed is offline
SOA
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 24
Default Car Insurance option question

Are there companies that offer an insurance policy that has a low deductible but also offers a maximum payout that is lower than the value of a car?

Here is my situation:

Car is paid off, but I don't want to insure the full value of the car. I want to insure a smaller amount, but I also don't want to jimmy rig this by lowering my deductible. In other words, I want to have a low deductible for something like hail damage or a small accident, but I only really want to insure enough to make a down payment on another car if it is totaled.

Put another way, I want to pay for full coverage as if my car is a less valuable one.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-07-2018, 12:30 PM
IANAE IANAE is offline
Member
CAS AAA
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 147
Default

For lower recovery with a total loss try asking for a stated value policy (pays lower of stated value or ACV).
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-07-2018, 02:37 PM
Westley's Avatar
Westley Westley is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 27,472
Default

I'm sure it's out there, although whether your agent offers it (or, assuming they do, that they are aware of it and willing to figure it out), not clear.

Just FYI, total losses aren't that common and the savings is unlikely to be material IMO. I wouldn't waste my time.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-07-2018, 03:57 PM
twig93's Avatar
twig93 twig93 is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 29,570
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Annoyed View Post
I want to insure a smaller amount, but I also don't want to jimmy rig this by lowering my deductible.
Assuming you meant "increasing"?
Anyway, I'm guessing that Westley's right and the savings aren't likely to be material.
__________________
Originally Posted by Gandalf
The thing that is clearest is twig's advice
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-08-2018, 01:10 AM
hostess's Avatar
hostess hostess is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 101
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by twig93 View Post
Assuming you meant "increasing"?
Anyway, I'm guessing that Westley's right and the savings aren't likely to be material.
decreasing in the negative direction
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-08-2018, 10:18 AM
Just Annoyed Just Annoyed is offline
SOA
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by twig93 View Post
Assuming you meant "increasing"?
Anyway, I'm guessing that Westley's right and the savings aren't likely to be material.
I did mean increasing, thanks
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-11-2018, 07:27 AM
Gabriel's Avatar
Gabriel Gabriel is offline
Member
CAS AAA
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: New York, NY
College: New York University
Posts: 214
Default

I would agree that the savings are not likely to be material.

For Homeowners, agents try to make sure that the limit of your policy keeps up with the value of your home because the pricing assumes that the loss distribution maxes at your policy limit. I have not heard of the same diligence for auto, but would not be surprised.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-11-2018, 08:30 AM
Arthur Itas's Avatar
Arthur Itas Arthur Itas is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 18,238
Default

I don't really understand the desire to cover only small losses. If you don't care about a big/total loss, why don't you drop physical damage and self insure? I imagine you would build up enough to cover your desired amount in a relatively short accident free period.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-11-2018, 01:26 PM
MightySchoop's Avatar
MightySchoop MightySchoop is offline
Member
CAS AAA
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Insula Primalis
Posts: 6,947
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabriel View Post
I would agree that the savings are not likely to be material.

For Homeowners, agents try to make sure that the limit of your policy keeps up with the value of your home because the pricing assumes that the loss distribution maxes at your policy limit. I have not heard of the same diligence for auto, but would not be surprised.
It generally wouldn't be necessary for Auto physical damage, as actual cash value is the upper limit of coverage for the standard coverage (stated value is a little different), and most insurers use a variable that captures the value of the vehicle (ISO cost symbols are common) and model year )which captures depreciation) in the rating plan.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-12-2018, 09:07 AM
Death Roo Records's Avatar
Death Roo Records Death Roo Records is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 1,380
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Westley View Post

Just FYI, total losses aren't that common and the savings is unlikely to be material IMO. I wouldn't waste my time.
Compared to What? Anecdotally, I was a claims adjuster, and I would say around half of my non-glass claims involved one or more cars totalling out. If the car is paid for, then it's likely a few years old at least, and even more likely to total out.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom View Post
Wow. I'm guessing your internet machismo is because you feel that you have 30+ alts to fall back on, including the ones waiting to be approved. Good luck with that.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.43798 seconds with 9 queries