It’s wild how many people think “full coverage” means literally everything is covered, but then you find out stuff like hail or a cracked windshield isn’t unless you’ve got comprehensive. I’ve seen folks get tripped up by that more than once. The mice thing—yeah, that’s a classic. Rodents are like the insurance world’s gremlins.
I’m curious, has anyone actually tried to file a claim for something super random, like tree sap damage or even vandalism, and gotten a weird answer from their insurer? Sometimes I wonder if the agents even know what’s in those policies half the time. It feels like every company draws the line somewhere different, and you only find out when it’s too late.
I tried to get my insurance to cover tree sap once—turns out, unless it’s some freak sap storm that damages half the neighborhood, they basically laugh you off. It’s wild how “full coverage” is mostly just marketing. Gotta read that fine print, even if it’s a headache.
Yeah, “full coverage” is such a loaded term. I learned the hard way after a fender bender—turns out my “full” policy didn’t cover rental reimbursement or glass, just the basics. The sap thing’s wild though... I always assumed if it messed up your paint or something, they’d at least help out a bit. Guess not.
Makes me wonder how many people actually know what their policy covers. Like, do most folks just trust the agent and hope for the best? I’ve had to file a couple claims (not proud of that), and every time there’s some weird loophole or exception. Ever had them deny something you thought was totally covered?
Yeah, “full coverage” is one of those phrases that sounds way better than it usually is. I can’t tell you how many times people come in thinking they’re bulletproof, only to find out their policy’s got more holes than Swiss cheese. Rental reimbursement, glass, even roadside—those are all add-ons, not standard. It’s wild how many folks just assume the basics cover everything.
The sap thing gets people every time. Unless you’ve got comprehensive and even then, some companies get real picky about what counts as “damage.” I’ve seen claims denied for stuff like bird droppings or tree sap because it’s considered “maintenance.” Feels a bit like splitting hairs, but that’s insurance for you.
I always tell people: don’t just trust the buzzwords. Actually read the policy (yeah, it’s boring) or at least ask your agent to break it down in plain English. The fine print is where all the weird exceptions live. Had a guy swear up and down his hail damage was covered—turns out he only had liability. Brutal lesson.
Yeah, you nailed it—“full coverage” is one of those terms that trips people up all the time. I’ve had folks come in furious after a storm, thinking their car’s protected, only to find out liability doesn’t do squat for hail. It’s rough having to break that news. Honestly, I wish more people would push their agents to spell things out, even if it feels awkward. The devil’s always in the details with insurance, and it’s not always fair, but that’s the game.
