I've been wondering about this myself since I'm pretty new to the whole insurance thing. I recently got a dashcam, and while I haven't had to use it yet (thankfully), I did chat briefly with my agent. From what she said, even lower quality footage can be helpful as long as it clearly shows who's at fault or what actually happened. Angles might matter if something crucial isn't visible, but usually, having any video at all is better than relying solely on memory... at least that's the impression I got.
Dashcams are definitely worth having. Had a minor fender bender last year, and my cheapo dashcam footage saved me from a "he said, she said" situation. Quality wasn't great, but it showed enough to prove my side... insurance couldn't argue much after that.
I've been on the fence about dashcams for a while now, but your experience makes a pretty solid case. Always figured insurance would find some loophole anyway, but glad to hear it actually worked out for you. Maybe it's time I reconsider... even if just for peace of mind. Thanks for sharing your story—it helps hearing real-world examples instead of just marketing hype.
I've been commuting daily for years, and honestly, my dashcam has saved me more than once. Had a similar skepticism about insurance loopholes myself, but when someone rear-ended me at a tricky intersection last year, the footage made all the difference. Insurance initially hesitated, but once they saw clear evidence, things moved quickly. It's not foolproof, sure... but having that extra layer of proof can really tilt things in your favor. Definitely worth considering for peace of mind alone.
Having dashcam footage can indeed be beneficial, though I've heard insurers sometimes dispute the footage quality or angle. Curious—has anyone here faced issues with insurers questioning dashcam footage validity or clarity? How'd you handle that?
