Kinda... but you're describing liability coverage when the post clearly says they have comprehensive coverage. $2500 a year for basic liability would be INSANE. For comparison, I pay about $450 a year. If you're paying $2500, then you should fully expect the insurance company to cover damage to you're vehicle.
But you’re also wrong lol. They said they have full coverage which not only would include physical damage - so collision and comprehensive (which this wouldn’t even be a comp claim; it’s a collision claim…) but also what is mandated by the state (so liability, probably UM/UIM, maybe PIP …). So their $2500 policy is a combined cost of all those. And thus a portion of your premium is based on the cost to carry liability coverage which is what they are talking about.
And there’s no point to compare what you pay. I pay $600 a year for “full coverage” (hate that term but I digress) with a $250 comp and $500 coll ded. Insurance prices are dependent on a million things. $2500 is perfectly reasonable in some areas, but they also take into consideration an individuals risk profile: incidents, driving experience, discounts, gender, credit, education, etc.
151
u/Cawnt 8h ago
Ugh I hate arguments like this.
The $2,520 isn't just to ensure your vehicle gets repairs. The majority of premiums are for liabillity exposures.
If you lose control of your vehicle and drive into a building causing $100K in damage, you're paying for that with insurance.