Years ago, I had a similar wake-up call. Thought I was being smart by skipping comprehensive coverage on my older sedan—figured it wasn't worth much anyway. Then one night, parked under a tree at my friend's place, a massive branch snapped off during a storm and crushed the roof. Totaled the car instantly. Suddenly, that "unnecessary" coverage didn't seem so unnecessary anymore.
But here's something I've wondered about since then: at what point do you all decide comprehensive coverage isn't worth it anymore? Is it purely based on the car's age or value, or do you factor in other things like your local weather patterns or parking situation? Curious how others approach this decision, because clearly, my method wasn't foolproof...
"Is it purely based on the car's age or value, or do you factor in other things like your local weather patterns or parking situation?"
Honestly, I used to think it was just about the car's age too, until last summer. My old Civic wasn't worth much, so I dropped comprehensive thinking I'd save a few bucks. Two months later, a freak hailstorm rolled through and turned my hood into Swiss cheese... lesson learned. Now, I factor in local weather and how exposed my usual parking spots are, not just the car's market value.
I learned the hard way too. A few years back, I figured my older Subaru wasn't worth enough to justify comprehensive coverage, especially since I park in a garage at home. But I totally overlooked my workplace parking lot—zero shade, zero protection. One afternoon storm later, and my car looked like someone took a hammer to it. Now I always factor in where I'm parking regularly and local weather risks, not just the car's age or value.
Yeah, I get your point, but honestly, comprehensive coverage isn't always worth it for older cars. Depends a lot on your local weather and parking situation. Still, hail damage can be brutal... learned that lesson myself once.
Good points, but as someone who's just now shopping around for my first insurance policy, I'm still kinda skeptical about skipping comprehensive. I mean, hail sounds nasty, but what about other random stuff like falling branches or vandalism? My car isn't exactly new either, but repairs still aren't cheap... Is there a general rule of thumb for deciding when comprehensive coverage stops being worth it?
