Hello, everyone
Every year, when the insurance risk comes to an end, a number of the owners receive quotation messages and phone calls from the insurance company. The first thing a lot of people get is to compare prices and choose where they are cheap. In order to reduce premiums, many car owners directly choose to derogate from additional risks, which are often the first to be removed。
Many of the drivers felt that they had already bought liability insurance for their personnel and that driving insurance was a double cost; others, having heard a brief introduction from the operator, had concluded that driving risk was a risk to the head, that it would be difficult to settle the damage, and that it was a pit dug by insurance sales. In reality, however, a large number of car owners find it costly to delete the risk of driving。
A core error is to be clarified here: the liability insurance of the personnel on board, which is often referred to as the seat insurance, and the risk of driving, which all appear to be safe people, are completely different from the bottom rules, and they cannot be replaced. Many of the drivers were unable to distinguish between the two, and the insurance was reduced blindly when it was renewed, and the extent of the safeguards gap was not known until an accident had occurred。
Let's start with seat insurance. Seat risk is an additional risk to the vehicle, tied to the vehicle. Simply put, whoever drives this car, it's the guy on it. The guarantee is limited to the insured vehicle, and the determination of compensation depends on the allocation of liability for the accident。
By way of example, the owner of the car a drove, two cars collided, and the traffic police found each other responsible. If the passengers on a were injured, the seat insurance would not have been paid and the compensation would have been borne entirely by the party responsible. If owner a is solely responsible for the accident, seat insurance will cover the costs of medical care and disability for the driver and passengers of the vehicle at the rate insured. Moreover, the seat insurance rate is set on a separate seat basis, with most drivers buying only 10,000 or 20,000 per seat at the time of taking insurance. In the event of serious injuries, this amount is far from covering the cost of treatment。
Let's see what we can do. Driving insurance is personal, in two versions, one with the car and one with the person. With the plates: whoever drives the car, if he sits in the insured vehicle and there is a traffic accident, he can be paid for it; with the plates: the insured person can be paid for the accident, regardless of the vehicle, if he sits in it. Its payment logic and division of liability for traffic accidents are not mandatory。
Again, in this case, the other side was responsible for the injury to the vehicle. The seating risk is not compensable, but the driving risk may be paid in accordance with the terms of the contract to compensate for the failure of the party responsible for the damage or the inability of the other party to pay. This is the core value of driving risk and the guarantee that seat risk cannot be covered。
Speaking of which, many of the drivers would question whether, since the two types of insurance were intended for people on board, the two would be able to buy them together, which would be a double reimbursement and would be useless
A distinction is made between two types of liability for compensation. Medical expenses are reimbursable and the same medical expenses cannot be duplicated. If after the seating insurance has been reimbursed for medical expenses, the remaining unreimbursed portion of the cost of the seating insurance, the driving risk may be followed by the remaining amount. In the case of disability, death or disability, the award is in the form of a payment of the contractually agreed degree of disability or disability, and the seat and driving risk are paid separately, with two premium premiums added and there being no conflict。
And that's the key to driving risk. This guarantee is rarely used in daily skirmishes; however, in the event of serious accidents such as serious injury or disability, the amount of insurance added can significantly reduce family economic stress。
Many of the drivers would argue that they are usually alone in their cars, with few people on board, and that there is no need to take risks. There is a gap in this idea. Even if the owner rarely carries his family and friends, the risk remains. In a traffic accident, even if the owner drives alone, in the event that an accident results in his or her own injury, the counterparty has to bear the high costs of medical care and rehabilitation if it is not insured or if the insurance is low. If only a low level of seat insurance were bought, the funding gap would be very large。
There's another type of high-frequency scenario that many car owners will ignore. On holidays, family members are taken out of the house and their friends are taken by road, and there are many passengers in the car. Once the accident had resulted in multiple passengers being injured at the same time, the allocation of 10,000 seats per seat would not be sufficient to cover the costs of treatment for many people. Risk sharing can be better achieved with higher levels of protection if driving risk increases。
Of course, it cannot be demagogueized, as it is not universal security, with clear exonerations, and it is the source of what many wrongly believe to be a “pit”。
First, driving risk only pays for injuries caused by traffic accidents. In the case of a car accident or a chronic disease, it is not an accident and is not within the scope of compensation. Secondly, such violations as drunk driving, poison driving, unlicensed driving and lack of annual examination of vehicles are exempt clauses and cannot be compensated in the event of accidents. Thirdly, the settlement is subject to the terms of agreement and is payable in full if the injury is not sustained, and the disability is accounted for in proportion to the degree of disability。
Many people feel that the risk of driving is a pit, mostly without a careful reading of the terms and an erroneous understanding of the scope of safeguards. There is also an exaggerated campaign of unprofessional sales, a promise of compensation for anything, a risk that does not meet expectations, and the owner of the vehicle will find the species itself problematic. Risks themselves are not good or bad. The key is to clearly secure borders and match their needs。
Next, let's talk about how to choose the driver's safety and avoid the spot。
First of all, do you know if it's human or car? The owner of a frequent change of car, who often drives different vehicles, is given preference over the personal version; the vehicle is fixed, often carrying family and friends, and preference is given to the car layout. Pre-purchase recognition of vehicle insurance information, avoidance of incorrect versions and uncompensable risk。
Secondly, the responsibility for safeguards should be clearly identified, with emphasis on whether accidental medical treatment includes self-financing drugs. The market portion of the risk is low, and medical contingencies are reimbursed only for internal medicine. In the event of a serious accident, many of the consumables and medicines are self-financed and cannot be reimbursed. To the extent possible, priority is given to products that include self-reimbursed medicines. At the same time, care is taken as to whether there is an exemption or a reimbursement rate for medical contingencies, and under the same guarantee, the product is more useful than 100 per cent。
Third, the criteria for disability assessment. It is important to recognize that the insurance provision applies to the assessment of personal insurance disability. For a few products, more stringent criteria are used and the threshold for disability compensation is high, making settlement difficult。
Fourth, a reasonable choice of the guarantee. In the case of ordinary domestic vehicles with a limited budget, the guaranteed amount of 200,000 to 500,000 per seat is a more mainstream option. Don't blindly pursue millions of super-high premiums, and the premium will increase significantly; and don't buy tens of thousands of lows, losing the point of risk。
Fifthly, attention is paid to occupational limitations of insurance coverage. While most of the driving risks are friendly to ordinary private car owners, those involved in the operation and transport of goods have to check their professional requirements carefully, and private driving is generally not applicable to operating vehicles. Operating vehicles have a specific motor safety product and cannot be mixed。
At the same time, it is important to clarify which situations do not require additional deployment of driving risk. If the owner of the vehicle himself and his family, who travel regularly, have been provided with full accident insurance and the contingency insurance includes liability for traffic accidents, in which case it can be assessed whether or not to buy a driving risk again. Common combined accident insurance is mostly human security, whether driving, riding or even walking. In such cases, the combined accident risk already covers the risk of traffic accidents, and driving risk is not an option。
A brief summary of the idea:
1. Only low-cost seating insurance, often staffed and adequately budgeted, can be supplemented by a combination of driving risk insurance。
2. The personnel on board are provided with full and comprehensive accident insurance and are free from double-purchase driving risk。
3. Operate vehicles and refrain from purchasing private car versions of driving risk。
The whole idea of vehicle safety cannot be focused solely on car damage, triangulation and risk insurance. Many of the vehicle owners ' policies for renewal are to buy them at risk, to raise the amount of the risk, to determine the age of the vehicle, and to remove all the additional risk and simply seek the lowest offer. This approach apparently saves hundreds of premiums, but embeds significant risks。
The insurance coverage is for crashes on other people's property; the insurance coverage is for the maintenance of their own vehicles. None of these two popular species guaranteed physical injury to the drivers or passengers in the vehicle. Many drivers risked 3 million, or 5 million, as a matter of urgency, while ignoring the physical security of their occupants, which is a very common area of cognitive blindness. The level of insurance was higher, and the third party was responsible for the non-reimbursement of the occupants。
Each year, the insurance company offers several programmes. Basic low-cost programmes often exclude all additional insurance. Sales would give preference to low-cost schemes to attract drivers, with few initiatives to explain the difference between seat and driving risk. Many owners do not know the details, and when they see low prices, they file directly, and when an accident occurs, they discover that there is almost no security in the vehicle。
I would also like to caution against deliberately lowering the seat insurance premium in order to save money. Many of the owner-seat insurance coverage is limited to 10,000 per seat, which in itself is weak. If it is not intended to buy a ride risk, at least an appropriate increase in the seat margin will be used as a base. Of course, seat insurance still exists, limited by liability for accidents and unable to respond to the full responsibility of the other party but unable to compensate。
A lot of car owners struggled with the choice of seat and driver. If the budget is tight, there can only be one choice: to pick up relatives and friends on a regular basis, giving priority to driving risk; and to drive almost unpopularly, with a limited budget, to increase the seating risk. The budget is adequate and the system is more complete。
A further step in the operation of the insurance will allow us to begin price-preparation 30 days before the expiry date, and not wait until a day or two before the expiration date for the order:
As a first step, existing insurance policies are collated, existing additional insurance is viewed article by article, seat insurance is identified and the scope of security is documented。
The second step is to prepare the daily car scene: single or frequent driving, whether the vehicle is operational and whether the vehicle personnel are individually insured。
The third step is to obtain a number of offers, not only against the total price, but also to decipher the corresponding liability for each risk. The focus is on the scope of medical claims and exemptions from liability clauses。
The fourth step would be to decide which additional risks would be deleted after the programme had been confirmed. Don't come up here and just pick out all the additional insurance。
Many drivers feel that insurance is useful because it's not a problem, it's a waste of money. Insurance itself serves to divert significant and unpredictable risks. Small accidents, which can be solved by health insurance, with a small amount of self-financing; the costs of disability, long-term rehabilitation resulting from major traffic accidents can easily be emptied of ordinary household savings. Hundreds of dollars of insurance premiums, in exchange for hundreds of thousands of dollars of risk, are essentially fixed by small amounts of expenditure and hedge against large, uncertain losses。
But it has to be rational, not blindly bought. Not all people have to take the risk of driving, but the core is to understand the borders, make choices about their car, not to be sold blindly, and not simply to cut it out because of one-sided perceptions. Ten more minutes to read insurance policy surcharges are much more important than simply saving a few hundred dollars。
Topical discussion
Did you delete the driver's risk while you were on insurance? Do you usually ride family and friends in cars? Do you value the price or the integrity? You are welcome to leave your comments in the comment area, to ask for attention and to continue to share knowledge of practical vehicle insurance, avoiding all types of error in insurance coverage。
