Title: Just saw a story about a guy in Kansas whose car got totaled by hail, and turns out his insurance didn't cover it.
It really does feel like a trap sometimes.
Honestly, it’s not just a feeling—it kinda is a trap. “Full coverage” is one of those phrases that sounds like it should mean you’re bulletproof, but in reality, it’s more like “full-ish coverage, but only if you read the fine print and pay extra for the stuff you actually need.” I learned the hard way a few years back when my car got sideswiped in a parking lot. Thought I was covered for everything, but nope—turns out my “full coverage” didn’t include hit-and-run unless I had uninsured motorist property damage. Who knew?
Insurance companies love to use vague language because it keeps people in the dark. I get that they’re running a business, but man, it feels shady. I always tell people: don’t trust the label, trust the paperwork. If you don’t see it spelled out, assume it’s not covered. And yeah, asking what’s NOT covered is way more useful than just hearing the sales pitch. Otherwise, you end up like that poor guy in Kansas... out of luck and out of pocket.
don’t trust the label, trust the paperwork
That’s the realest advice right there. “Full coverage” is basically marketing speak—like calling a tiny bag of chips “family size.” I got burned once thinking my policy covered flood damage, but nope, that was “optional.” It’s wild how you have to play detective just to know what you’re actually paying for. Insurance feels less like protection and more like a gamble sometimes.
It’s wild how “full coverage” gets tossed around like it means you’re bulletproof, but really, it’s just a bundle of whatever the agent thinks you’ll buy. I learned the hard way too—thought I was set until a tree branch smashed my windshield and suddenly “comprehensive” didn’t mean what I thought. Turns out, you have to literally read every line and ask about every scenario you can imagine.
Honestly, I keep a spreadsheet now with what’s actually covered and what’s not, because the paperwork is dense and the language is slippery. It’s not just about being paranoid—it’s about not getting blindsided by fine print. Insurance companies bank on people assuming they’re covered for everything under the sun, but unless you see it in black and white, it’s probably not included.
I get that it feels like a gamble, but if you treat it more like a contract negotiation than a safety net, you’re less likely to get burned. It’s a pain, but it beats finding out after the fact that hail or floods or whatever aren’t part of the deal.
Yeah, “full coverage” is basically a magic trick—looks impressive until you realize the rabbit’s missing. I drive a Benz and thought I was golden, but nope, had to add glass coverage separately. My agent acted like I was asking for the moon. Now I triple-check every renewal… learned my lesson after a rogue shopping cart left a dent and it wasn’t covered. Insurance is like ordering à la carte—if you don’t ask, you’re just getting fries.
Insurance is like ordering à la carte—if you don’t ask, you’re just getting fries.
That’s a pretty spot-on analogy. “Full coverage” gets tossed around so much, but it doesn’t actually mean everything’s included. I’ve seen folks with luxury cars assume hail, glass, even rental were all standard. It’s wild how often people find out too late—usually after a shopping cart or a hailstorm does its thing. Honestly, I wish the industry would just call it “basic combo” instead of full coverage… would save a lot of headaches.
