Car Insurance: What are your experiences?

I mean, what else do you actually get out of it besides just looking at the price tag? That’s pretty much the only thing there is to feel, unless you count those little perks that honestly shouldn't even be considered part of the mandatory coverage in the first place—like roadside assistance or bonus protection and stuff like that—but they just bundle them right into the policy itself 😁

Personally, I guess having roadside assistance matters to me, but you really have to weigh that against what you're paying. For instance, this year my Allianz policy ended up being $133 more expensive than my GEICO one, and honestly, I don't think that extra cost is even worth it.

Right now, I'm sitting at 25% with Allianz. But I just got an offer from Mount Rainier that basically doubles my old bonus. Honestly, the price looks incredible—I don't think I could find a better deal anywhere else. So, what's the verdict on Mount Rainier? Anyone know if they're actually reliable or if they have any issues?

What kind of headaches can you actually run into with your insurance? I mean, you could end up having issues with whoever you happen to hit 😬

As for that whole duplication thing, I guess you should probably look into it, since most companies offer it in one way or another just to make sure you don't go hunting for some other quote that's maybe a couple hundred bucks cheaper down the line 🙂

Brandon Edwards36 said:Right now, I'm sitting at 25% with Allianz. But I just got an offer from Mount Rainier that basically doubles my old bonus. Honestly, the price looks incredible—I don't think I could find a better deal anywhere else. So, what's the verdict on Mount Rainier? Anyone know if they're actually reliable or if they have any issues?

As the previous poster pointed out, you won't personally run into any issues—the only ones who might suffer are the people you eventually cause damage to.

That said, when it comes to collision coverage, you really need to be careful about which insurer you pick. You shouldn't let a low premium blind you to the quality of the provider.

Hannah Allen5 said:What kind of headaches can you actually run into with your insurance? I mean, you could end up having issues with whoever you happen to hit 😬

As for that whole duplication thing, I guess you should probably look into it, since most companies offer it in one way or another just to make sure you don't go hunting for some other quote that's maybe a couple hundred bucks cheaper down the line 🙂

Jesse Doyle3 said:As the previous poster pointed out, you won't personally run into any issues—the only ones who might suffer are the people you eventually cause damage to.

That said, when it comes to collision coverage, you really need to be careful about which insurer you pick. You shouldn't let a low premium blind you to the quality of the provider.

It’s just not right... unfortunately, everyone seems focused on whether they'll be billed for some minor detail, without ever considering that if you hide an accident where a loved one was riding with you, someone dear to you could end up being held liable by that policy.
Of course, I can already hear everyone saying, "Oh, I'm such a pro driver, I'll definitely never be at fault," but honestly, that mindset says a lot about a person's judgment.

So, when you're signing up for mandatory coverage, please think about whether you'd really risk having your kid, spouse, sibling, or best friend stuck in legal battles over a claim just because you opted for $67a cheaper policy
instead of checking which company is actually reliable and going with them.
It's funny how it works—if you were buying a new AC unit, nobody would even hesitate to pay a few extra bucks for a reputable brand rather than a cheap knockoff, yet when it comes to this, people act so differently.

I'm not talking about any specific person's question here; I'm just speaking generally.

The guy who ripped me off was working with an insurance company, and even though we were playing nice at first, they made it such a massive headache just to get them to actually pay out the claim.
Honestly, I can't even imagine if this had gone to court—my car would’ve been stuck at the shop for months, or worse, I would've ended up footing the bill myself. We're talking a decent chunk of change here, basically everything my local mechanic and body shop spent getting the thing back in shape.
So, yeah, lesson learned—I don't fall for those sales pitches anymore. Now, I just go with the cheapest option available.

Look, I personally find it pretty hard to believe that the United States would hold up on payments without a good reason (you didn't really specify why they're stalling or what that actually entails), but if you haven't experienced firsthand how some people drag others through the legal system for years, you might be comparing apples to oranges. Of course, there are always exceptions to the rule.

So, after the accident, they cleared the car off the road just because the cops told us to—they didn't even bother doing a full scene investigation, so we just filled out and signed an EU report ourselves. The guy admitted he was at fault, so I immediately hauled the car over to the insurance adjuster and then straight to the body shop.
Man, it was a struggle to get it there—firstly, I had to drive it straight to CO for the estimate, otherwise, I would’ve been stuck paying for a tow truck out of my own pocket just to get it to the insurance lot. Then it was public transit back home, and the next morning, early bird special, I'm back out there for the adjuster to document the damage so it matches the crash, and then finally driving the thing to the authorized repair shop.
New car, roughly $33k.
The shop had everything fixed up in three weeks. Still had to rely on public transit to get home, and I actually had to borrow a car from my brother just to get by.
I think it took about two months before the insurance company finally settled the body shop bill—they actually tried to lowball me, offering way less than what the repairs actually cost, and they seemed genuinely shocked at how expensive it all was. It wasn't until I "threatened" them—and I totally meant it—saying I’d just pay the bill myself and stop paying into mandatory insurance altogether since it's clearly useless if nobody gives a damn that I'm left without a vehicle for months. I told them they can't expect the shop to store my car forever for free either; eventually, storage fees kick in. Only after that did they suddenly decide I was being too impatient and actually sent the payment.
Before all that headache, they were breathing down my neck for a police accident report. I contacted the local precinct and they sent me some confirmation that the accident happened, but apparently, that wasn't enough for the insurance folks. They wanted specific investigation details that don't even exist because the cops didn't want to do the paperwork, but the neatly filled-out EU report didn't quite satisfy their requirements regarding CO's liability. They even demanded a second copy of the report from the other driver—luckily, he was cool about admitting fault. So, I had to track him down, and since he was a decent guy, we filled out his copy too, making sure it matched the first one and using the actual date of the accident even though we were filling it out much later. Honestly, it scares me to think what would've happened if the guy had refused to admit anything or sign anything—I could've been stuck without a car for months with zero help. Nobody cares, especially not CO; I'm left without a ride, the shop won't lend me one, and the insurance company doesn't care if I have a spare. It's basically just "figure it out yourself, buddy," and don't even get me started on the stress.

Yeah, and? What exactly did the USA do wrong here?

It’s not like the police were involved; reconstruction to check for potential fraud is standard practice for pretty much any insurance company out there. I mean, do you honestly think anyone is just going to sign off on a $30,000 vehicle claim just because you asked nicely?
And then there's this whole thing about rental cars and public transit—honestly, stop acting so entitled, what does any of that have to do with them?
The two-month window is the legal deadline, so they aren't actually breaking any rules there.
Wait, did you seriously tell them you wouldn't pay your premiums? LOL, how exactly would you go about renewing your registration then?
Regarding that EU report, if the guy refused to plead guilty, he'd be in massive trouble. But that mess wouldn't be caused by the USA or some insurance provider; it would be his own fault. Without a police report, and with both sides telling different stories, how are they supposed to pay out?

Basically, you're just venting wildly without having a clue about the actual struggles people face when they have to fight through the court system for years over serious injuries.

PS This isn't really about the USA; it's about clearing up the huge misconception that it doesn't matter which company you choose for your mandatory coverage.

The cops showed up, sure, but they didn't even bother doing a proper scene investigation. And look, I get it—you can get slapped with a fine if you don't clear a drivable car off the road—but that doesn't change the fact that the car has massive damage. Plus, this official report they gave me is a total mess; it clearly shows two people filling out a single copy, yet CO is out here demanding two separate copies like it's some kind of rule.
Basically, the police have no clue how to do their jobs when I end up having to do their paperwork for them, and apparently, the standard EU documentation isn't good enough for them... CO is just being incredibly nitpicky over nothing.
And honestly, if CO actually wanted to be helpful, they should've offered me a rental or at least a ride. It’s not like I decided to lose my property by choice—their policyholder is the one who trashed my car.
My work is piling up, my time is being wasted, and frankly, nobody seems to give a damn.
I'll say it again: if companies like CO or Euroherc are still charging those ridiculous premiums, just dump them. Seriously. They’ve been padding their pockets for years off those high rates.

Frank Walker7 said:It’s just not right... unfortunately, everyone seems focused on whether they'll be billed for some minor detail, without ever considering that if you hide an accident where a loved one was riding with you, someone dear to you could end up being held liable by that policy.
Of course, I can already hear everyone saying, "Oh, I'm such a pro driver, I'll definitely never be at fault," but honestly, that mindset says a lot about a person's judgment.

So, when you're signing up for mandatory coverage, please think about whether you'd really risk having your kid, spouse, sibling, or best friend stuck in legal battles over a claim just because you opted for $67a cheaper policy
instead of checking which company is actually reliable and going with them.
It's funny how it works—if you were buying a new AC unit, nobody would even hesitate to pay a few extra bucks for a reputable brand rather than a cheap knockoff, yet when it comes to this, people act so differently.

I'm not talking about any specific person's question here; I'm just speaking generally.

We were discussing "normal" circumstances, given that most policyholders skip passenger insurance simply to save money. It’s true what you said—it isn't right that people get screwed over because of $67, but that's just the reality of it.
However, you have a point: if AO is included along with passenger insurance, then the reputation of the provider matters immensely.

To build on the topic of claim payouts: you generally know which insurers are known for being "difficult" when it comes to paying out, though there are always exceptions. With Allianz, for instance, I've never known anyone to have issues, yet recently they refused to pay a claim for a friend under his comprehensive coverage. They claimed the damage couldn't have happened the way he described (he said someone hit him in a parking lot, but they insisted it could only happen while driving). If I hadn't pulled some strings, that man would have been left without $1.75 because he doesn't understand these technicalities and certainly wouldn't have fought the claim in court.

Jesse Doyle3 said:We were discussing "normal" circumstances, given that most policyholders skip passenger insurance simply to save money. It’s true what you said—it isn't right that people get screwed over because of $67, but that's just the reality of it.
However, you have a point: if AO is included along with passenger insurance, then the reputation of the provider matters immensely.

To build on the topic of claim payouts: you generally know which insurers are known for being "difficult" when it comes to paying out, though there are always exceptions. With Allianz, for instance, I've never known anyone to have issues, yet recently they refused to pay a claim for a friend under his comprehensive coverage. They claimed the damage couldn't have happened the way he described (he said someone hit him in a parking lot, but they insisted it could only happen while driving). If I hadn't pulled some strings, that man would have been left without $1.75 because he doesn't understand these technicalities and certainly wouldn't have fought the claim in court.

Did they try to sell you on the idea that passengers aren't covered unless you opt for that extra rider?
I honestly can't believe that little trick is still being used today... that add-on shouldn't have anything to do with the actual legal right to compensation that a passenger is entitled to regardless of the extra coverage.

EDIT: Regarding what you mentioned, we all know who typically makes things difficult, and it’s certainly not the USA, Allianz, or most of the major international insurers... hmmm... so who is actually left for us to turn to? Of course, a few bad apples can happen anywhere, but that's just how it goes sometimes.

I mean, I think there are plenty of instances where things went sideways with either the USA or Allianz, or maybe cases where HOK, Source, Agram, or some other player really dropped the ball—and vice versa, of course—but honestly, that’s less about the insurance itself and more about whoever is sitting in the chair deciding whether or not to approve a claim.

On top of that, the extra passenger coverage only kicks in for death or permanent disability. For any other kind of injury, you're stuck with a cap of about $6 million for bodily injury! I don't think anyone has ever actually managed to explain to me what the point of this extra coverage even is, or why we're even debating the moral dilemma of whether or not to sign up for it. If someone dies, your insurance pays out maybe $3 million to their heirs. Or if they end up with a 20% disability, it pays out maybe $600k 😕

Hannah Allen5 said:I mean, I think there are plenty of instances where things went sideways with either the USA or Allianz, or maybe cases where HOK, Source, Agram, or some other player really dropped the ball—and vice versa, of course—but honestly, that’s less about the insurance itself and more about whoever is sitting in the chair deciding whether or not to approve a claim.

On top of that, the extra passenger coverage only kicks in for death or permanent disability. For any other kind of injury, you're stuck with a cap of about $6 million for bodily injury! I don't think anyone has ever actually managed to explain to me what the point of this extra coverage even is, or why we're even debating the moral dilemma of whether or not to sign up for it. If someone dies, your insurance pays out maybe $3 million to their heirs. Or if they end up with a 20% disability, it pays out maybe $600k 😕

There are definitely examples out there, but if you look at the percentages, one side clearly takes the lead... so I wouldn't necessarily say it comes down to the individual adjuster; I highly doubt anyone would let an employee go rogue like that, whether they're being too helpful or too difficult.

The extra insurance is just that—an add-on. It can be a nice little thing to have, and banks sell it alongside checking accounts and everything else, but some people still insist it's a mandatory necessity when, in reality, it's pretty much irrelevant.

I’m sitting here staring at my insurance policy, and I see this listed:

- Coverage per claim:

-$14250 for individuals

-$2833 for property
---------------------
Now, just to be clear, this is all part of my basic policy—no extra riders or add-ons included...

What does this actually mean in plain English, and who specifically is covered under these terms?

You’re looking at amounts that are basically *1000 times higher than what you think.

I guess it applies to everyone who got hurt in the car accident, assuming there’s actually a legal basis to demand a payout—like if the insured driver was clearly at fault, maybe because they were driving like a maniac, cruising without a license, or being totally reckless by driving on summer tires in a blizzard or something like that.

Hannah Allen5 said:You’re looking at amounts that are basically *1000 times higher than what you think.

I guess it applies to everyone who got hurt in the car accident, assuming there’s actually a legal basis to demand a payout—like if the insured driver was clearly at fault, maybe because they were driving like a maniac, cruising without a license, or being totally reckless by driving on summer tires in a blizzard or something like that.

So, does Accenture step in there?

Liability insurance is one thing, but you also have to account for driver protection regarding non-material damages. That’s where things get messy because the driver ends up getting pulled directly into the fray, since standard liability doesn't actually cover those kinds of claims.

Hannah Allen5 said:You’re looking at amounts that are basically *1000 times higher than what you think.

I guess it applies to everyone who got hurt in the car accident, assuming there’s actually a legal basis to demand a payout—like if the insured driver was clearly at fault, maybe because they were driving like a maniac, cruising without a license, or being totally reckless by driving on summer tires in a blizzard or something like that.

The claim gets paid, but then the insurance company goes after the driver for reimbursement up to the amount of 12 average US salaries, at least for the scenarios you mentioned.

I guess I didn't quite wrap my head around that part, because I honestly thought the insurance company wouldn't pay out anything at all.

But anyway, does any interest actually accrue on what the insurer demands you pay back? I mean, if we're looking at an amount equivalent to 12 average monthly salaries, we're talking nearly $70,000, and for someone stuck with a lower income, it could easily take them over a decade just to chip away at the principal alone.🤷