Remove Collision Coverage on '98 Civic DX Coupe with 156K Miles?

Hello,
I am asking for advice as to whether I should remove collision coverage on my 1998 Civic DX coupe that has 156,000 miles on it. I bought the car brand new 10 years ago.
If I remove the coverage, it would save me approximately $20/month. Kelley Blue Book states that the trade-in value of the car would be anywhere from $2,000 - $3,000, depending on the car's condition. I would say that my Civic is in-between fair to good condition. It still runs good and I have kept up with it maintenance-wise.
Thanks for your advice, Kevin
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
its costing you about $240.00 per year for the coverage . if you have enought money put aside, (about $ 2,500.00) to replace it and are willing to take your chances then drop the coverage .
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
If the annual cost for collision and comprehensive insurance on your car is more than 10% of what you'd get from your insurer, then it's time to consider dropping them. Say the car is worth $3,000 & your deductible is $500. Then your risk (exposure) is $2,500. If your collision premium is $250 per year, then the rule of thumb says to drop the collision coverage and bank the $250 for the next car. (see more at http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Insurance/InsureYourCar/DumpTheInsuranceOnYourClunker.aspx

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kevin G. wrote:

I have a 1997 Civic EX coupe with about 75k on the odometer and I dropped my collision and comp coverage based on how badly I was screwed in my last car wreck. The blue book on the totaled vehicle was 26k and my insurance company gave me close to 19k for it.
When my agent tried to sell me insurance on the 1997 Civic, he was pushing for me to add comp and collision. I flat out told my agent, why should I pay you an extra $400 per year for a car that you will just total after a mere fender bender?
This was my line of thinking. Why should I pay an extra $400 for insurance plus a $500 deductible for a vehicle that I would be lucky to get $2,000 for if my insurance company were to total it?
Maybe someone can shed some light as to if my line of thinking is incorrect....
- Chris
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nope, that's about right. I generally keep the comp, if the price is right, just for the glass, but if it is too much of a difference, what's the point? You'll lose in the long run.
--
Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
joe at hits - buffalo dot com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Joe wrote:

Also, uninsured motorist property damage will pick up damage to your car as long as it is not your fault. Deductibles apply of course...
And maintaining comp is a good idea. Just one deer strike can ruin your day...
JT
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Grumpy AuContraire wrote:

Yet insurance companies pay out far less than they collect. The only reason why the company wants to sell the insurance is to make money. The OP is better off keeping the money.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jeff wrote:

Not if he maintains his vehicle and is principally interested in the transportation value of his vehicle rather than "trade" value.
JT
(Whose '83 Honda is pure gold...)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
ChrisB wrote:

Insurance is for things that you can't afford to replace, like a new car or a house. While it is a lot of money, losing $2500 for a car ($3000 - $500 deductible) should be something that most people can afford.
Your thoughts are correct. Chances are that in five years, your car won't be in a crash where having the insurance will make a difference (don't forget, if you're in a crash and another party is identified and responsible for the crash, that party is responsible). So chances are that after 5 years, you'll $2000 + interest in the bank. On the other hand, if you do get the insurance, in 5 years, you'll have the canceled checks.
Don't forget, the reason why the insurance saleperson wants you to buy the insurance is that the insurance company make a profit and the insurance person a commission. Insurance companies make a ton of money of the policies. In the long run, you're probably much better off keeping the money. After 5 years, you'll have $2000 to help pay off the new car.
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kevin G. wrote:

collision coverage means that if you have any reported collision, the insurance company owns your car, and they write it off. you get a check for "fair value" and no car. and "fair value" isn't much.
if you "insure" the car for collision yourself, /you/ get to decide whether the car gets written off. if it's a minor event, you can afford to pay the repairs and keep the car running - you wouldn't have that option with collision coverage. if it's major, you go buy a new car and sell the crashed one for parts.
oh, and if you /do/ pay for crash repairs yourself, it's usually a lot cheaper than an insurance repair. you know, cash, beer, barter, etc.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.