Notifications
Clear all

Why Is PIP Mandatory In Some States But Not Others?

83 Posts
81 Users
0 Reactions
711 Views
Posts: 15
(@mark_phillips)
Active Member
Joined:

Honestly, I get the whole “peace of mind” thing, but I’m still not convinced PIP is always worth it. Like, yeah, it’s fast if you get rear-ended, but I’ve had friends who ended up paying for both PIP and health insurance and barely used either.

“Tried to figure out if I’d be double-covered or just paying for overlap... gave up after page three of legalese.”
Same here—felt like I needed a law degree just to figure out if I was wasting money. Sometimes I wonder if it’s just another way for insurance companies to squeeze more out of us. Maybe I’ll change my mind if I ever actually need it, but right now it feels like a gamble.


Reply
photographer53
Posts: 5
(@photographer53)
Active Member
Joined:

Honestly, I get where you’re coming from—insurance legalese is basically designed to make your eyes glaze over. But here’s the thing: PIP isn’t just about medical bills. Ever tried getting your regular health insurance to pay for lost wages or a babysitter after a crash? Good luck with that. PIP steps in for stuff your health plan usually ignores.

But yeah, it can feel like double-dipping, especially if you’ve got solid health coverage already. The overlap is real, and half the time, people don’t even know which policy pays first until they’re knee-deep in paperwork. I’ve seen folks get frustrated because they paid for both and barely used either, but I’ve also seen people who were glad they had PIP when their health insurance left them hanging on deductibles or co-pays.

Is it a money grab? Maybe a little. But it’s also about states wanting to make sure nobody gets stuck with bills after a crash. Depends on how much risk you’re willing to take, I guess. Wouldn’t say it’s always a waste, but yeah, it’s not exactly straightforward.


Reply
Posts: 5
(@leadership261)
Active Member
Joined:

That’s a good point about PIP covering stuff regular health insurance just doesn’t touch. I’ve always thought it was weird how some states make it mandatory and others don’t, though. Seems like if it’s that important, why not just make it the rule everywhere? Or is it more about how much folks in different places trust their own health coverage to pick up the slack? Curious if anyone’s actually had to use both at once—did it go smoothly or was it a paperwork nightmare?


Reply
Page 17 / 17
Share:
Scroll to Top