Derek is 100% right. Most insurance GAP covers a percentage while Toyota GAP will cover the full amount. Plus, with your insurance you’ll pay whatever your deductible is with Toyota GAP you do not pay a deductible. I’ll never lease a car without GAP especially if you are rolling in negative equity to it.
1 Like
Most of the time you can get GAP with Toyota for $600. Pay that upfront instead of rolling it into the lease. How in the world are you getting approx $600 per year? The most I’ve ever seen it be is $1,050 up front.
$545 for Lease
$795 for Finance
A poster here said was $50/month added onto his lease. That’s $600/yr aka $1800 for 3 according to my math.
I think? You should know
Yeah, about that, it’s highly frowned upon on this site. How would any of us know what garbage this dealer sells.
From your posts you seem to be all over the place and haven’t posted any solid numbers. Sounds like @Cody_Carter gave you a decent quote but you shopped it and that dealer might have been less but quoted this crazy $50/mo gap number. So yeah I’m not really sure where you’re at…
Don’t see any topics that you started about a deal that you were quoted on
Doubt anyone locally is beating my numbers 
Especially with GAP and $1k EWU included at no charge
5 Likes
Why are you dealers saying GAP insurance only covers “a portion” of the GAP. That makes no sense at all. Am I misreading?
Maybe you’re referring to the fact that some GAP policies may not include the hazard policy deductible. But a hazard deductible has nothing to a GAP policy. The GAP is still paying the gap. And some GAP policies will pay the deductible so you’d be 100% covered.
The whole reason and point to purchasing this edge case insurance is to cover the difference between what the bank says you owe and what the hazard insurance company will pay in the case of disaster. End of story.
Your car explodes because an EQ in CA occurred and a bridge fell on it while you were eating donuts in a coffee shop. Vehicle is totaled. Insurance says it will pay $42,000. Banks says you owe $48,000. GAP kicks in and pays $6,000.
The policy that I will be getting will cover my deductible as well.
Every GAP policy that I have seen clearly states the above scenario will be covered.
There are of course limits to a GAP policy but those limits don’t affect what the policy is for (to pay the “GAP” for you in normal circumstances like a bridge falling on your car after an earthquake 
) Maybe this is where the confusion is stemming from?
As far as wear and tear you should say “Excessive” because “Normal” wear and tear is included in the contract. The car is being normally used. It WILL have wear and tear. Scratches and the like are NORMAL. Prove they aren’t. A key down the door? No. A bumper chip the size of a pinhead from a freeway rock? NORMAL.
And another misnomer is when people are told they need to pay for tire and brake wear. Ummm. NO. That is also part of normal wear and tear. If it’s not, then the residual value when returning would be at 100% because you’d be asking me to bring the car back to brand new status yet I just paid for 3 years worth of “use”. 3 years of use on tires and brake is what it is. 3 years of use on those items do not equate to brand new brakes or brand new tires. People have to think about this stuff. Clearly I do 
No, he was incorrect and I posted Toyota’s own language proving that.
Their policies vary by state and maybe in your state Toyota covers the entirety but that’s as far as generalizations should go.
For the most part you’re correct, but not every GAP policy will pay the entire GAP. A lot of times there is a % they will max out at. Say, 120% of ACV…if you owe more than 20% over what the ACV is, GAP will only cover the 20% and you could be on the hook for the % over 20%.
Clearly the way you merely think about anything has no bearing on the language of a contract. If the insurance policy has a $ or % coverage limit or your lease contract says tires must be at least 4/32” tread when returned, then thinking or saying “it is what it is” will change neither of those financial liabilities
Yes you are correct.
My statement was based on “normal” wear and tear which is stated in the contract but hard to disseminate in a forum 
What I’m saying is that if you go over the limits that are specified in the contract, then yes you are responsible. But, if you go over the contract stipulations, it would be considered “excessive” right?
My context was people who return a vehicle and are told they automatically have to, for example, replace tires and brakes even though they are in spec in contract.
I guess I should have worded it more like that.
Other than the lease that you are going in negative equity, is there a reason your lease drops over 20% just driving off the lot?
Or is it the brand, aka don’t get non Manufacturer Gap on a BMW for instance (I don’t know if it is included)
The original poster was asking about a Toyota Tacoma, and I don’t think they drop over 20% off the lot right?
I was just thinking the same thing…
I just calculated a scenario based on my current purchase of about a year old.
The ACV (I’m going by “trade-in” but I think insurance would go with a “retail” range) is very close to the payoff. If I worked with the insurance company, I doubt GAP would kick in and I’d prob get a credit because I am basing the ACV on the lowest possible limit in the range of “excellent condition” so it’d be well within the 20%. But if they valued it as average or poor in retail, I’d be getting a check and GAP would not kick in.
But yeah, if you have a 9% interest rate and a 84 month loan on an oddball vehicle it’s possible you’ll be out of the full coverage range of GAP. This might apply to say a Dodge Hellcat. Very expensive, prob a huge interest rate. And a lot of people who buy Hellcat’s likely paid a huge dealer premium over sticker. Those deals would likely be excluded from normal GAP policies. The GAP I’m choosing wouldn’t even cover it because it’s over $100K.
You just have to know your GAP policy, like everything else.
- I don’t have anything on me about GAP insurance, please check with Dealer.
- DO NOT LEASE WITH TOYOTA, ask the Dealer if they go through U.S. Bank and have the deals ran side by side. If dealer does not use U.S., try a different dealer.
Bear
Yeah the 3 dealers I’m considering do use US bank I’ve had multiple others advise not to use US bank but I’m dumm found since they offer the best lease numbers I don’t understand why some dealers advise against using them any experience with us bank lease in California?
The rumor is US Bank is extremely picky on lease returns / 3rd party purchases.
which means Smart Hackers would get angry on charges that would be ignored by the Captive banks.
That is what I said about scratches/dents!