I took a look at the cost breakdown for insurance on new to me Tracer GT. Total premium $1,203 and accident benefits cost is $940.
The complete scam here is accident benefits. The insurance industry has put together a bundle of coverage they say you need and then force you to pay for it. Wouldn't you like to be in a business where you define what customers need, then you cost it out and, finally, you have government mandate that this insurance coverage must be purchased.
Coverage I don't need or want. (MY COMMENTS IN CAPS)
Caregiver benefit
If you are unable to continue as a primary caregiver to your family, this benefit will reimburse you for the costs of hiring someone to help. This benefit helps out single-parent families, families with one stay-at-home parent, or households with other types of dependants. (COMPLETELY UNNEEDED AND VALUELESS TO ME)
Income replacement benefit
If you’re unable to work because of your injuries, this will compensate you for the loss of your income. The benefits pay the lesser of a maximum of
70% of your net income or $400.00 weekly (whichever you hit first). (I'M RETIRED AND ON A DB PENSION, TOTALLY UNNEEDED AND USELESS COVERAGE)
Death and funeral benefit
If you were to pass away as a result of a car accident, the death benefit provides a lump sum payout to your spouse and your dependants. The funeral benefit provides a lump sum payout to cover some of the costs associated with your funeral expenses within 180 days of the accident.
Insurers have until 156 weeks after the accident to pay out the policy if the person involved was continuously disabled because of it.
Typical policies pay out these accident benefits:
- $25,000 to the person’s spouse.
- $10,000 to each of the insurer person’s dependants.
- $10,000 to former spouses if the insured person had financial obligations to them.
- A funeral benefit of up to $6,000.
(I ALREADY HAVE LIFE INSURANCE AND DON'T NEED OR WANT THIS COVERAGE)
Non-earner benefit
The benefit itself pays $185 per week minus all other income replacement assistance received during that time. The non-earner benefit lets insured people claim payment if they fall into one of these circumstances:
- They suffer the inability to look after themselves (or to “carry on a normal life” as the law is worded) while also not qualifying for an income replacement benefit within 104 weeks of the accident.
- They are no longer able to carry on a normal life because of the accident and within 104 weeks of it, plus:
- is enrolled in full-time education of any kind, or;
- completed education within a year before the accident was wasn’t employed (or self-employed).
(COMPLETELY NON-RELEVANT TO ME, USELESS COVERAGE)
Other expenses benefit
This benefit may pay for expenses such as:
- Lost educational expenses (USELESS)
- Costs for bringing family members to visit you in rehabilitation facilities (USELESS)
- Reasonable costs related to housekeeping or home maintenance (NOT NEEDED)
I acknowledge that other people's circumstances may be difference, but this 1 size fits all approach hugely benefits insurance companies who are charging accident benefits on an owners multiple vehicles for coverage that it completely unnecessary.
The other issue is that based on articles I've read actually getting your insurance company to pay out these benefits is like pulling teeth. Many insurance companies seem to have a policy of denying or limiting claims and them putting the onus on injured to fight for the civerage they paid for.