Cunning Runt Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Here's the situation: My 16yr old son is getting his driver's license this coming Tuesday. Good responsible kid, but he's a 16yr old kid so responsibility really doesn't have a whole lot to do with it. He's gonna make mistakes. That said, the car he's gonna be driving is a 2002 Honda Accord - probably worth around $4,500 if I were to sell it - still a very nice car though. An insurance adjuster would probably total it out on a repair over maybe $2000. The car is paid off so full coverage is not required. I've kept full coverage on it and at pretty low deductibles because it's been pretty cheap for me to do that. My ex-wife and I are splitting the cost of the insurance and she's good either way I go. I had my insurance guy quote me three rates: 1 based on the low deductibles - $250/$500 would cost $955 every six months. 2 based on a higher deductible - $500/$1000 would cost $839 every six months. And 3 - based on liability coverage (PLPD) only at a $500 deductible on the other car/property costs only $490 every six months. If he were to get in a wreck early, the lower deductibles are better. If later (or better still, not at all), it would seem PLPD is the way to go. It's summer so no snow to drive on for several months. The higher deductibles make no sense so we're not considering it. The ex and I discussed going with the lower deductibles for a year to cover his "learning curve" then dropping it down to PLPD once he's had some experience behind the wheel. Given the scenario presented, what would y'all do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 a good pair of nikes cost about 90 bucks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Given the scenario presented, what would y'all do? I would stop thinking a Honda Accord is a very nice car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunning Runt Posted June 2, 2009 Author Share Posted June 2, 2009 I would stop thinking a Honda Accord is a very nice car. 143,000 miles with nothing but routine maintenance and running like a top, that = very nice in my book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Agent Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 OTC coverage is other than collision (not other car). There is no deductible to you when your vehicle damages another. OTC or comprehensive covers hail, theft, fire, etc. Basically perils that are not your fault. If it were me, I'd take collision off and run with the OTC coverage only. Review your bodily injury limits. A 16 year old is very likely to get in an accident. Make sure you have plenty of coverage there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 I would stop thinking a Honda Accord is a very nice car. your mailman is now your borvette's mechanic......good luck!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T_bone65 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 We were in the same position almost a year ago with my then 17 y/o and his first car which is almost the same exact car but his is a 1998 accord with 151K and was worth around 4K. We went ahead and did full coverage, or should I say he pays for his own full coverage now since he is 18 and works fulltime. It really didn't cost that much more over a 6 month term and gives him/us piece of mind that it will be covered if something were to happen. Also, we have progressive and for every 4 years without an accident we are given 1 at fault accident freeby including him since we added him to our policy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 your mailman is now your borvette's mechanic......good luck!!! Obama is changing my oil right now. He's suggesting a new air filter. Gawd-danged upsells. I always go high deductible/lower premium...until the kid proves he can't drive. I'd also make him pay part of it to get him used to it. I'll never forget our two kids when they started paying their own insurance after school ended...I don't think they ever considered there was insurance on a car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 I'll never forget our two kids when they started paying their own insurance after school ended...I don't think they ever considered there was insurance on a car. You don't have 2 kids in that situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 You don't have 2 kids in that situation. Well, then someone else dropped off 2 kids at around 12 years old for me to raise that weren't her daughters Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulzale Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 OK, here is the way I see it. Full coverage, go with the lower deductible as the premium difference isn't that much. Now the big decision is whether to just have PLPD on the car. Based on $4,500 value being constant and if he would total the car the break even point is around 5 years between the two rates. I would say that gets closer to 3 years with depreciation. If he wrecks the car anytime within the 3 years the full coverage is the best value, if he stays accident free longer than 3 years then the PLPD is the better value. Based on what I remember being a teenager, my first fender bender was measured in months and not years.....just my 2 cents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunning Runt Posted June 2, 2009 Author Share Posted June 2, 2009 OK, here is the way I see it. Full coverage, go with the lower deductible as the premium difference isn't that much. Now the big decision is whether to just have PLPD on the car. Based on $4,500 value being constant and if he would total the car the break even point is around 5 years between the two rates. I would say that gets closer to 3 years with depreciation. If he wrecks the car anytime within the 3 years the full coverage is the best value, if he stays accident free longer than 3 years then the PLPD is the better value. Based on what I remember being a teenager, my first fender bender was measured in months and not years.....just my 2 cents. Kinda the way I was looking at it too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 I would stop thinking a Honda Accord is a very nice car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Holy Roller Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 OK, here is the way I see it. Full coverage, go with the lower deductible as the premium difference isn't that much. Now the big decision is whether to just have PLPD on the car. Based on $4,500 value being constant and if he would total the car the break even point is around 5 years between the two rates. I would say that gets closer to 3 years with depreciation. If he wrecks the car anytime within the 3 years the full coverage is the best value, if he stays accident free longer than 3 years then the PLPD is the better value. Based on what I remember being a teenager, my first fender bender was measured in months and not years.....just my 2 cents. At one time I had three teens driving on our policy. I always went this route because it made the best sense for our situation, none of their vehicles were worth more than 6K so the numbers worked out a little different. All three of them had "fender benders", the oldest son had three. It's certainly not a question of "if". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.