"Makes me wonder if insurers secretly judge us based on what we hit... deer vs mailbox vs raccoon?"
Interesting thought—maybe it's about property damage vs wildlife? Mailboxes usually mean someone's property got damaged, so insurers might see that as riskier. Anyone know if that's actually how they calculate it?
Not sure insurers really care about the mailbox vs wildlife thing specifically. From what I've seen, it's more about frequency and cost of claims overall. Had a friend who hit a deer—damage was pretty extensive, and his rates jumped noticeably. Another time, I clipped a mailbox (don't ask...) and the damage was minor enough that I didn't even bother reporting it. My premiums stayed the same. Seems like insurers mostly look at how often you're filing claims and how expensive those claims are, rather than what exactly you hit. Could be wrong, but that's been my experience anyway.
"Seems like insurers mostly look at how often you're filing claims and how expensive those claims are, rather than what exactly you hit."
Yeah, that's pretty much spot-on from what I've seen too. Actually, one thing I'd add is that insurers often categorize claims differently based on fault vs. no-fault incidents. For instance, hitting wildlife is usually considered a comprehensive claim, which might impact rates less severely than an at-fault collision with property (like your mailbox scenario). Just another factor worth keeping in mind...
That's generally true, but doesn't the type of claim sometimes matter more than you're suggesting? Like, even if hitting wildlife is comprehensive and usually less severe, I've heard of people seeing noticeable rate hikes after multiple comprehensive claims. Maybe insurers start viewing frequent comprehensive claims as a pattern of risky driving habits? Not sure if that's universal or varies by company, but it might not always be as straightforward as fault vs. no-fault...
"Maybe insurers start viewing frequent comprehensive claims as a pattern of risky driving habits?"
I've wondered the same thing myself. A couple years back, I had two deer collisions within a short time frame, and even though both were comprehensive, my rates went up noticeably at renewal. Seems insurers might indeed flag frequency, regardless of fault...
