If you don't have uninsured motorist insurance...
#11
04-10-2012, 02:56 AM
The insurance companies don't like to write UM coverage. They are insuring you for damage by every drunk, uninsured and miminally insured driver, every teenage girl on her phone and every unlicensed driver out there. Your medical coverage DOES NOT cover you for lost wages or earning capacity(future loss wages), loss of enjoyment of life(like sitting in a wheelchair with no sex life forever), pain and suffering, or wrongful death benefits for your wife and children if you die. These damages are huge. Say you are 30 years old and make 30,000 per year. If you can't work for the next 35 years that's basically 30 times 30,000. If your medical bills are 400,000(not unusual) your family is bankrupt and living in a homeless shelter. And the risks for you are greater on a bike than in a cage.
#12
04-10-2012, 04:35 AM
Road Warrior
I go the other way. I have always only carried the absolute minimum liability only coverage that Illinois requires. Back in the day before mandatory insurance I never had any.
Since I have been riding since 1956 and have had multiple bikes since the 70's that is one heck of savings over full coverage.
I have 7 bikes and minimum coverage is $542 for them. Full coverage would be about that for one. So, I am saving about $3K/year.
Insurance is to protect from a catastrophic loss that is not affordable. Since I pay cash for the bikes and even if they all burned up in the garage, I could go out and buy all new and a garage. Therefore I don't need the coverage.
It is not something that I would recommend to the weak of heart.
I pay less than MSRP with my cash purchasing so there is no interest cost. I do my own maintenance and avoid the extended warranties ( which are more correctly service contracts) and only about $80/yr/bike insurance my ownership costs are very low. Since I keep them and don't sell or trade them in, I am even exempt from any depreciation.
I have been doing this since the 70's so if I would have kept a log on the amount saved I am sure that it would amount to at least a couple of bikes by now.
That is part of the reason that I have more $ than my contemporaries who had the same income but wanted "piece of mind".
Since I have been riding since 1956 and have had multiple bikes since the 70's that is one heck of savings over full coverage.
I have 7 bikes and minimum coverage is $542 for them. Full coverage would be about that for one. So, I am saving about $3K/year.
Insurance is to protect from a catastrophic loss that is not affordable. Since I pay cash for the bikes and even if they all burned up in the garage, I could go out and buy all new and a garage. Therefore I don't need the coverage.
It is not something that I would recommend to the weak of heart.
I pay less than MSRP with my cash purchasing so there is no interest cost. I do my own maintenance and avoid the extended warranties ( which are more correctly service contracts) and only about $80/yr/bike insurance my ownership costs are very low. Since I keep them and don't sell or trade them in, I am even exempt from any depreciation.
I have been doing this since the 70's so if I would have kept a log on the amount saved I am sure that it would amount to at least a couple of bikes by now.
That is part of the reason that I have more $ than my contemporaries who had the same income but wanted "piece of mind".
#13
04-10-2012, 04:35 AM
Seasoned HDF Member
#14
04-10-2012, 04:39 AM
Seasoned HDF Member
All well and good if you have been putting that money saved away in case you get hit. Lets do some math - $3k/year for 40 years is $120K, if you get in a serious accident, the hospital bills and liability hit could be waaayyyy more than that very very easily.
I go the other way. I have always only carried the absolute minimum liability only coverage that Illinois requires. Back in the day before mandatory insurance I never had any.
Since I have been riding since 1956 and have had multiple bikes since the 70's that is one heck of savings over full coverage.
I have 7 bikes and minimum coverage is $542 for them. Full coverage would be about that for one. So, I am saving about $3K/year.
Insurance is to protect from a catastrophic loss that is not affordable. Since I pay cash for the bikes and even if they all burned up in the garage, I could go out and buy all new and a garage. Therefore I don't need the coverage.
It is not something that I would recommend to the weak of heart.
I pay less than MSRP with my cash purchasing so there is no interest cost. I do my own maintenance and avoid the extended warranties ( which are more correctly service contracts) and only about $80/yr/bike insurance my ownership costs are very low. Since I keep them and don't sell or trade them in, I am even exempt from any depreciation.
I have been doing this since the 70's so if I would have kept a log on the amount saved I am sure that it would amount to at least a couple of bikes by now.
That is part of the reason that I have more $ than my contemporaries who had the same income but wanted "piece of mind".
Since I have been riding since 1956 and have had multiple bikes since the 70's that is one heck of savings over full coverage.
I have 7 bikes and minimum coverage is $542 for them. Full coverage would be about that for one. So, I am saving about $3K/year.
Insurance is to protect from a catastrophic loss that is not affordable. Since I pay cash for the bikes and even if they all burned up in the garage, I could go out and buy all new and a garage. Therefore I don't need the coverage.
It is not something that I would recommend to the weak of heart.
I pay less than MSRP with my cash purchasing so there is no interest cost. I do my own maintenance and avoid the extended warranties ( which are more correctly service contracts) and only about $80/yr/bike insurance my ownership costs are very low. Since I keep them and don't sell or trade them in, I am even exempt from any depreciation.
I have been doing this since the 70's so if I would have kept a log on the amount saved I am sure that it would amount to at least a couple of bikes by now.
That is part of the reason that I have more $ than my contemporaries who had the same income but wanted "piece of mind".
#15
04-10-2012, 04:57 AM
Yes, that's very true. I had a 45 minute procedure done recently, and spent one night in the hospital. Not a week or more in a coma...bill was over $47,000 for that...something to think about.
#16
04-10-2012, 05:03 AM
You did not hit the woman did you? if not, why would you need that coverage to begin with, if you went down your insurance should cover "Your" accident regardless of what started it in action, What if it had of been a Dog you tried to miss? do you need doggy insurance as well? ..sounds like you should have told them you just went down and dont remember it happening, maybe because of the bump to the head? its all in the way you present it to them. Insurance is like doing business with the Mofia, they want to collect and are real happy to do so, but when it comes time to pay, its like pulling teeth and fingernails along with breaking bones.
It's a single vehicle accident. Should be covered by collision protection.
#18
04-10-2012, 05:10 AM
Outstanding HDF Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It sounds to me that he is only concerned about replacing his bike, not about funding medical bills.
#19
04-10-2012, 05:26 AM
I'm glad I live in a civilised country with free health care, even if it means higher taxes.
#20
04-10-2012, 05:36 AM
Outstanding HDF Member