The insurance that covers such an event is literally called collison insurance.
The insurance that covers such an event is literally called collison insurance.
For posterity: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/collision-insurance.asp
> ... it will cover damage from potholes, and accidents involving an inanimate object.
In the rental space, collision damage waivers - CDWs - explicitly don't cover undercarriage, wheels, windshields and so on, the kind of damage we're talking about here.
https://www.aviva.co.uk/insurance/motor/car-insurance/what-a...
https://www.avis.com/en/help/usa-faqs/cdw-insurance
https://www.avis.com/en/products-and-services/protections/lo...
Well the other night some asshole decided to pac-man all the cones on the highway late at night so we had to navigate a field of almost impossible to see cones (the borders are black and there were no lights up). Several cars, including mine ended up running over a few. I got lucky as it just messed up my paint a bit on the front bumper and I lost a license plate. Two other vehicles crashed over it, really sucked.
Called Geico when I got home and was informed I don't have collision coverage. They told me for this I would have needed comprehensive coverage and collision coverage.
Well joke's on them, my renewal is this month and I'm bouncing. I'd rather find another company that won't weasel out on me. When I signed up I said I wanted to be covered no matter what. I pay enough monthly I should be.
Forcing nsurance (health and renters, cars,etc) should be illegal,it doesn't work as it should. It ends up being a tax we pay to still have to pay out of pocket no matter what.
I am fairly certain that it would be illegal for an agent to sell that to you without clarifying.
Funny enough, one of the first articles to pop up in a search for this is from Geico: https://www.geico.com/information/aboutinsurance/auto/full-c...
What's your alternative to mandatory liability insurance, given that there are drivers with much greater liability risk than others?
As another reply to me mentioned, 'full-coverage' should be just that. The US allows so much lies I believe nothing, our gov't lies ,ads lie, politicians lie,police lie,lawyers...well
You'd also need some new framework for dealing with high-risk drivers - e.g. instead of increasing the insurance cost for someone with a DUI conviction, you'd need to simply take away their ability to drive.
There also exist numerous jurisdictions with publicly provided insurance, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurance_Corporation_of_Briti...
I have a feeling the rats are collaborating on price.