Writing on behalf of my girlfriend whose car was hit by a semi truck while her car was parked on a residential street in California. She has a clean record, she was obviously not at fault for this claim, and only drives for errands and leisure; her job is remote. This is her first insurance claim. The truck company wants to settle with her insurance instead of filing a claim through their own insurance. So we'll get the deductible back, but they're saying her car is a total loss due to age and mileage, even though it was running perfectly with no cosmetic or functional issues until the accident.
Since she doesn't drive daily, we're going to try a month of her using public transit, me driving, and Ubers before buying another car (she's only getting $5k for the ACV). Her claims guy recommended non-owner car insurance as her "premium could go up" if we decide she needs a car later because "insurance companies don't like gaps in coverage." How true is this? She won't be driving anyone else's car or renting cars during this time and we'd opt for insurance on a rental if she did need one. How much of a difference would this make on her premium? Is this just a sales tactic? How seriously should we consider this if she's never behind the wheel?
Non-owner car insurance impact to premium
byu/crudmudd inInsurance
Posted by crudmudd
1 Comment
It’s absolutely true. If she was going years without driving at all, I would be OK with not getting a non owner’s policy. But she’ll likely pay far more in higher rates of she has a lapse, than the non owners premium. If she has a lapse, some companies won’t even sell her a policy until she has 6-12 months continuous coverage.