Insurance premium and RV NADA Value

[Scottsdale]

If the insurance company that you use for your RV insurance is like mine (Progressive), they use the NADA value of your RV to determine a large percentage of your insurance cost for Comprehensive and Collision.

Due to my stupidity, I had not had Progressive to update the value of my RV for several years and thus I was paying much more in premiums than I needed to.

I just saved about $300.00/year with a simple phone call to my agent and had them update the NADA value on my policy and recalculate my premium cost.

Check your policy to see what value they have you insured for. If it is much higher than what NADA says its worth (as that is what they will use if your RV is totally destroyed), then you might get a significant savings like we did.

My wife and I are now contemplating what we are going to spend the $300.00 on.

[ZephyrKnight]

So does that mean your policy does not cover "Replacement Cost"???
Because, if that's the case, you only "saved" money if you never need to make a claim...but take it from someone (me) who lost a motorhome to a fire, getting a check for "current NADA value" vs. current NADA REPLACEMENT VALUE is a MONUMENTAL difference...

I "saved" $ Money $ too...and then I made a claim...it barely paid the note.

Just my "2-cents" worth

Bob

[WOODYDEL]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scottsdale If the insurance company that you use for your RV insurance is like mine (Progressive), they use the NADA value of your RV to determine a large percentage of your insurance cost for Comprehensive and Collision. Due to my stupidity, I had not had Progressive to update the value of my RV for several years and thus I was paying much more in premiums than I needed to. I just saved about $300.00/year with a simple phone call to my agent and had them update the NADA value on my policy and recalculate my premium cost. Check your policy to see what value they have you insured for. If it is much higher than what NADA says its worth (as that is what they will use if your RV is totally destroyed), then you might get a significant savings like we did. My wife and I are now contemplating what we are going to spend the $300.00 on.

We have Progressive. I'm going to check this out. I've watched too many people over the years get way less than what they thought it was worth.

My brother in law's brand new car totalled by another driver. He had a loan to pay. They gave him less than the car cost and he only had it a month. He had to make up the difference out of pocket. It sucked then and it is still going on.

I'm not dissatisfied with Progressive but if THEY think my premium should be less, why argue?

Thanks for making me think about it.

[bob109]

Quote:

Originally Posted by WOODYDEL We have Progressive. I'm going to check this out. I've watched too many people over the years get way less than what they thought it was worth. My brother in law's brand new car totalled by another driver. He had a loan to pay. They gave him less than the car cost and he only had it a month. He had to make up the difference out of pocket. It sucked then and it is still going on. I'm not dissatisfied with Progressive but if THEY think my premium should be less, why argue? Thanks for making me think about it.

Had your brother in law had GAP insurance he wouldn't have had out of pocket expenses. This insurance is designed to cover the difference between the loan balance and NADA value of the vehicle.

[jcthorne]

Quote:

Originally Posted by WOODYDEL We have Progressive. I'm going to check this out. I've watched too many people over the years get way less than what they thought it was worth. My brother in law's brand new car totalled by another driver. He had a loan to pay. They gave him less than the car cost and he only had it a month. He had to make up the difference out of pocket. It sucked then and it is still going on. I'm not dissatisfied with Progressive but if THEY think my premium should be less, why argue? Thanks for making me think about it.

Your brother in law got scammed by the other party's insurance company. He was entitled to recover has actual losses, not the book value of the car. His actual loss is what it takes to make him whole. He should have gotten an lawyer if he could not make the claim without one.

When you have a loss against your own insurance, most policies state actual cash value of the vehicle at time of loss. That does not apply when someone elses liability insurance is paying the claim although the insurance companies like to make you think it does.

[WOODYDEL]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcthorne Your brother in law got scammed by the other party's insurance company. He was entitled to recover has actual losses, not the book value of the car. His actual loss is what it takes to make him whole. He should have gotten an lawyer if he could not make the claim without one. When you have a loss against your own insurance, most policies state actual cash value of the vehicle at time of loss. That does not apply when someone elses liability insurance is paying the claim although the insurance companies like to make you think it does.

Well, he didn't get scammed. That word didn't exist then. No fault didn't exist then.

He wasn't smart enough to go after the other guy in court.

Gap insurance didn't exist 30 years ago.

Insurance companies have been pulling these "scams" for a good long time which I didn't explain in my example.

Back then getting a lawyer was not as common as it is today.

Please no more solutions about what my brother in law could have or should have done.

[bigmichael]

As Zephyrknight began to touch on, for the most part, none of this applies if your a full-timer. Most of the full-time policys I've seen, provide for full replacement cost during the first 5 model years. Following the first 5 model years, the policy switches to guarenteed oringinal purchase cost.

Thus, the actual insurance company pay-off in the event of total loss has the probability of increasing during the first 5 years, but is still locked in following that. So you will not see premiums decrease, as the $ amount the insurance company is obligated to does not decrease in a total loss, regardless of the current value of the rig.

I don't know if this same kind of policy is sold for non-fulltime use or not. I know before we became full-timers our RV was insured under the "traditional" type, total loss resulted in a pay-off based on current value.

[Scottsdale]

When I originally bought the motorhome when I lived in Ohio, I got the Full Replacement in my policy from Progressive. When I moved my residency to Texas, Progressive could not/would not give me a Full Replacement. Don't remember the exact conversation 4 years ago.

[WOODYDEL]

I checked with Progressive. My policy has "Total Loss Replacement/Purchase Price" for collision and comprehensive. I read all the fine print etc.

This is what it states:

"Total Loss Replacement/Purchase Price

Total Loss Replacement/Purchase Price coverage provides you with a new, untitled RV if your RV is five model years old or less and is deemed a total loss. If an RV older than five years is deemed a total loss, the payout will be the purchase price as reflected on the Declarations page.
The purchase price value includes all permanently attached equipment, tax, title and license. The value should be increased if additional equipment is added. This coverage is only available for new RVs, up to one model year old."


Told my wife, she can stop worrying about no guardrails on those mountain roads!.

The price they charged us is OK.

Thanks for the tip.