- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: State Farm is mandating a "Multicar policy" on my family
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:05 am to DCtiger1
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:05 am to DCtiger1
quote:
25/50 is not “full coverage” there’s no such thing as full coverage. 25/50 is extremely low for liability
This kind of thing isn't covered by the OED or Merriam-Webster, but I've always understood "full coverage" to mean the kind of insurance you're required to have by the bank financing your car, as opposed "liability" which only suffices to keep you in compliance with state law. Never heard anyone say there's "no such thing" as full coverage, though I do agree that it's a somewhat inaccurate term.
As for getting liability coverage that goes beyond the state-mandated minimum, I don't think that has anything to do with "full coverage" in the popular vernacular (which is the only context where it even makes sense to talk about "full coverage").
Also, I see people here suggesting one ought to carry more liability than the state minimums, but I have literally never heard that advice given anywhere else nor do I know of anyone who has inflicted or would inflict such an optional expense on himself. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, just that it will never even cross the minds of 90% plus of drivers, myself included.
This post was edited on 6/23/25 at 11:06 am
2
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:05 am to SallysHuman
quote:
We have what they recommended for a brand new 4Runner.
You’re talking about comp and collision. If you are found at fault, your policy is paying 25k for the other persons injuries and damages. Where will the rest of the money come from when the damages are in excess of 50k?
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:06 am to DarkDrifter
quote:
The term “full coverage “ is a misnomer.
Do tell.
quote:
When most people use the term it because they have liability and comp and collision.
I agree, that's how most folks conflate the terms.
quote:
there’s several other coverages that are optional that most people skimp on.
I don't think anyone out there thinks "rental reimbursement", "roadside assistance", etc. makes something "full coverage" or not. You talking about U/M, hazard/tire/glass, baw? Spit it out, man.
quote:
the term is absolutely meaningless to us agents
Meh. It isn't meaningless to customers. Educate us plebes, my guy.
This post was edited on 6/23/25 at 11:08 am
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:06 am to SallysHuman
quote:
No, the teen could drive any vehicle as long as they aren’t excluded. SF is one of the only companies that still has permissive use.
quote:
That's what our experience has been, so I don't understand the complaint the other poster had.
Same. My 2 Teen sons are each assigned a different vehicle as the "Primary Driver", but anyone who is insured in the family can drive any insured car.
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:07 am to DCtiger1
quote:What do you mean by this?
SF is one of the only companies that still has permissive use.
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:07 am to FortunateSon
quote:We recently signed our 19 year old college student’s car over to him and got him his own policy with our carrier, Allstate. My wife and I have higher end cars and without him rated on those the rest of our policy went down by a good amount. Just give the kid the car. We have maximum liability and and just got him like 50/100.
My main reasons for wanting them separate is that 1) My kids are leaving soon, and it seems more straightforward to move a single car policy than to extricate a car from a group policy. 2) My kids are in college. If they get a ding on their driving record, I don't want it to affect my cars.
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:07 am to Porpus
quote:
Also, I see people here suggesting one ought to carry more liability than the state minimums, but I have literally never heard that advice given anywhere else nor do I know of anyone who has or would inflict such an optional expense on himself. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, just that it will never even cross the minds of 90% plus of drivers, myself included.
If you injure someone and medical expenses are 50-100k? Who’s paying for those excess damages? Your policy is paying the limit and that’s it. We haven’t even gotten to their vehicle yet.
You’ve never heard you should have more than state minimum liability? Yikes
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:08 am to Porpus
quote:
This kind of thing isn't covered by the OED or Merriam-Webster, but I've always understood "full coverage" to mean the kind of insurance you're required to have by the bank financing your car, as opposed "liability" which only suffices to keep you in compliance with state law. Never heard anyone say there's "no such thing" as full coverage, though I do agree that it's a somewhat inaccurate term.
As for getting liability coverage that goes beyond the state-mandated minimum, I don't think that has anything to do with "full coverage" in the popular vernacular (which is the only context where it even makes sense to talk about "full coverage").
Also, I see people here suggesting one ought to carry more liability than the state minimums, but I have literally never heard that advice given anywhere else nor do I know of anyone who has inflicted or would inflict such an optional expense on himself. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, just that it will never even cross the minds of 90% plus of drivers, myself included.
The reason why is to protect YOURSELF.
minimum limits means they have a 25/50 property damage policy. How many of you drive a car worth more than $25K?
uninsured motorist coverage: $15K is minimum limits for liability in LA. If I get injured badly, $15K isn't gonna do squat.
I have a 300/500 policy w/1M umbrella. Debating upping it to 2m.
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:09 am to DCtiger1
quote:
You’ve never heard you should have more than state minimum liability? Yikes
There are advantages to being "judgment proof". Not worrying about stuff like this is one of them.
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:09 am to AlxTgr
quote:
What do you mean by this?
More and more of the big carriers will deny claims for any driver not listed in the HH. Let’s say an undisclosed teen driver, your neighbor, a friend. Permissive use covers you in those instances
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:10 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
There are advantages to being "judgment proof". Not worrying about stuff like this is one of them.
Not sure that’s possible in most states. In FL, wage garnishment comes to mind
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:11 am to Chad504boy
quote:
no you don't. god damn, are you a woman?
Yes.. I do. I went in and sat with the agent when we purchased the vehicle.
We skipped rental because we have 3 other vehicles.
If it counts for anything we've had StateFarm for everything for the entirety of our adult lives and maybe 3 claims total in over 25yrs.
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:11 am to DCtiger1
quote:that'll get denied if they can prove it was intentional.
et’s say an undisclosed teen driver
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:12 am to SallysHuman
quote:Agents are taught to sell liability, comp, collision only. Why? Because those are the coverages they have the biggest profit on. They are taught not to sell UM/UIM and other coverages.
I went in and sat with the agent when we purchased the vehicle
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:13 am to SallysHuman
quote:
I do. I went in and sat with the agent when we purchased the vehicle.
Call your agent right now. Ask him, if you run over a child running out into the street, is your full coverage liability limits he/she suggested going to protect you completely?
If you total a new 90k Mercedes that someone just drove off the lot, will the 25k property damage absolutely protect your legal liabilities in that accident?
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:19 am to DCtiger1
if you are listed as a driver it is not considered permissive use. Permissive use is for non household members, with their own liability coverage being allowed to operate your vehicle.
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:22 am to Neauxla
quote:
that'll get denied if they can prove it was intentional.
Possibly, but progressive will 100% deny any driver not in the hh
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:23 am to deathvalleygrassmmmm
quote:
if you are listed as a driver it is not considered permissive use. Permissive use is for non household members, with their own liability coverage being allowed to operate your vehicle.
Correct. That could include an adult child or your parent. If they are driving your vehicle with permission it will be covered. That is becoming less and less common
Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:24 am to Neauxla
quote:
Agents are taught to sell liability, comp, collision only. Why? Because those are the coverages they have the biggest profit on. They are taught not to sell UM/UIM and other coverages.
nothing like speaking in absolutely wild absolutes. Definitely not the case in FL Posted on 6/23/25 at 11:24 am to DCtiger1
quote:that's not true.
Possibly, but progressive will 100% deny any driver not in the hh
Page 3 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News