Figure that virtually any significant collision would cause sufficient
damage to total any '97 Honda. With that in mind, why spend the money for
any collision coverage? Just go with liability & comprehensive coverage and
you'll save plenty. If you are worried about not being covered for
collision, in an "at fault" accident; just put the money saved from
collision premiums into a savings account. You'll be much better off in the
Personally, I've never carried collision coverage on anything (including my
MGs and my Porsche 356) but my wife's Passat, and my BMW 2002Tii ("back in
the day"). I figure that, in the event of an at fault collision, I'm going
to fix the damn thing myself, anyway, and if I'm stupid enough to bend it I
deserve the financial pain that goes with it. So far, in 46 or 47 years of
driving, the only cars that we've had at fault claims with were the ones
we've had collision coverage on.
Maybe a lesson to be learned, here ;)
----- Original Message -----
From: "chuck" <email@example.com>
To: "spridget list" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 2:55 PM
Subject: [Spridgets] OT: Collision Insurance??
> Hey Youse Guyz! It's that time again, insurance renewal.
> Aside from the Midget, we have two 1997 Honda sedans
> used for rainy/snowy conditions. Both still carry 250-deductible
> collision for no known reason. Given the age of these cars, does
> this make any sense?? What about the 100-deductible
> These ain't expensive, but if I cancel them do I hurt myself??
> thanks 'n all
Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html