I swear, every time I hear someone say they have "full coverage" insurance, I just roll my eyes. Like, what does that even mean? I thought it meant literally everything was covered, but nope—apparently, there's always some random exception or fine print. Last month, my windshield cracked and guess what...not covered. Um, isn't that kinda basic? Starting to think "full coverage" is just marketing speak. Anyone else run into this or am I just unlucky?
Yeah, the term "full coverage" can definitely be misleading. It usually just means you have liability, collision, and comprehensive coverage—but even then, there are exceptions and deductibles. Windshield coverage often falls under comprehensive, but some policies exclude glass or require a separate rider. Learned this the hard way myself when a tree branch dented my hood...thought I was fully covered, but nope, deductible kicked in. Always worth double-checking the fine print or asking your agent directly to avoid surprises later.
Yeah, this is exactly why I've been hesitant about picking my first insurance policy. The whole "full coverage" thing sounded reassuring at first, but after reading stories like yours...I'm realizing it's not that straightforward. I mean, I assumed windshield damage would automatically be covered too—never even considered needing a separate rider or dealing with deductibles. Thanks for sharing your experience; it's helpful (and a little scary!) to hear real-world examples. Definitely gonna take your advice and grill my agent on the specifics before signing anything. Better safe than sorry, right?
Yeah, "full coverage" is honestly a bit misleading. Learned that the hard way when my car got keyed—thought it'd be covered, but nope, deductible kicked in. Always double-check specifics, especially for smaller stuff like glass or vandalism... insurance fine print is no joke.
