Honestly, I’ve tried reading through those credit card rental insurance policies and my eyes just glaze over after a while. There’s always some weird clause about “acts of nature” or “wildlife incidents” that makes me think they’re looking for loopholes. I’ve done a couple Montana trips and you really do see deer everywhere at dusk. Has anyone ever actually had a claim denied because of hitting an animal, or is it just one of those internet horror stories? Just curious if it’s as common as people say, or if I’m overthinking it.
There’s always some weird clause about “acts of nature” or “wildlife incidents” that makes me think they’re looking for loopholes.
I totally get that feeling—those policies are a headache to read. I’ve actually heard mixed things about animal collisions in Montana. A friend of mine hit a deer near Bozeman and the rental company tried to say it wasn’t covered under his credit card insurance because it was an “unavoidable wildlife event.” He ended up paying out of pocket, which kinda freaked me out. Has anyone here had luck with their claim actually going through? Or is it just a roll of the dice depending on the company? Also, does anyone bother with the extra insurance just for peace of mind, or do most people just risk it?
He ended up paying out of pocket, which kinda freaked me out.
That’s exactly why I always get the extra coverage, even if it feels like overkill. Montana roads are gorgeous but unpredictable—deer, elk, even the odd cow wandering onto the highway. I’ve heard too many stories like your friend’s, where the fine print leaves people stranded with a big bill. I know some folks roll the dice and rely on their credit card or personal insurance, but I just can’t relax unless I know I’m covered for those “wildlife incidents.” The rental companies definitely seem to use those vague clauses to their advantage.
It’s frustrating, because you’d think hitting a deer would be a pretty standard accident, but apparently not. The peace of mind is worth the extra $10-15 a day for me, especially in places like Montana. Maybe I’m just overly cautious, but I’d rather not gamble with my wallet out there.
The peace of mind is worth the extra $10-15 a day for me, especially in places like Montana.
I tend to agree, though I’ll admit I used to be skeptical about those add-ons. Once had a minor incident with a luxury rental—barely a scratch, but the paperwork and liability questions dragged on for weeks. Even with my own insurance, it was a headache. Montana’s stunning, but the open range means you’re just as likely to encounter a herd of cattle as a deer. The “wildlife incident” loophole is real... I’d rather pay a bit more upfront than deal with the aftermath. Still, sometimes it feels like these companies are stacking the deck against us.
Honestly, I think the extra insurance is overkill most of the time.
That’s fair, but if your personal auto policy or credit card already covers rentals, why pay twice? I’ve driven through Montana plenty—yeah, wildlife is a risk, but the odds of a major incident are still pretty low. Feels like rental companies bank on fear more than actual risk. I’d rather pocket the $10-15 a day unless I’m driving something exotic or way off the grid.“Even with my own insurance, it was a headache.”