You are the one making assertions here, not I. I asked questions. There is no such thing as “do your research to back up your questions”. Besides, why would I ask a question if I already knew the answer?
Can we get some libel memes please! And a definition also
1 Like
Be my guest, have fun with memes. But I am curious: does any meme fan here have a clue what happens when you purchase replacement insurance on a leased car and your car gets totaled?
You could def shut everyone up if you post a contract like originally said. Until we see the legalese nothing matters
By doing that you would be providing factual solutions to many problems in this situation.
1 Like
Ok I get the point–and then some. Can we please close this topic?
3 Likes
So just to help leasing noobs (Totally not me) out. Basically:
Don’t prepay your lease using a trade in because if you crash the car you get screwed since insurance won’t pay out to you but will pay out to the bank instead.
Use MSD instead if you want to trade in and prepay.
Outta curiosity, does this mean one pay leases don’t make any sense? Since you’ll get screwed?
This also have been asked a dozen times.
2 Likes
Thus far, none of the insurance companies that i have looked at that offer replacemrnt insurance will issue it on a leased vehicle.
1 Like
Where is the post on LH where someone had replacement coverage (not to confuse with full coverage and gap), totaled their car and got nothing, while bank collected full replacement cost of the used, depreciated and totaled vehicle?
Not asking about BMW drivers who totaled cars and had insurance pay bank “fair market value” during COVID when prices were hugely inflated.
I did quick search and didn’t find a post/thread where someone had replacement coverage at the time of total loss.
I can’t speak about others, but Travelers does.
https://www.travelers.com/car-insurance/coverage/new-car-replacement
Like OP I am in CA, I have a lease, and Travelers is also my insurance: as their website clearly states New Car Replacement coverage is not available to lessees.
Accident Forgiveness coverage IS available, that is just an agreement to not raise rates for 1 accident, it doesn’t cover new car replacement.
8 Likes
Replacement coverage for a lease does not appear to exist, so i doubt you will find any.
You will find lots of examples of where an insurance policy payout greatly exceeded the buyout value, and that extra value above buyout went to the lessor, not the lessee, per the terms of the lease contract.
1 Like
That’s interesting. I will call my agent on Monday and ask why they offered/added car replacement coverage to my policy. They know full well the car is leased.
And I made zero downpayment on car, no need to carry a useless coverage.
Replacement coverage for a lease does not appear to exist, so i doubt you will find any.
Ironically, I have it on my new lease.
You will find lots of examples of where an insurance policy payout greatly exceeded the buyout value, and that extra value above buyout went to the lessor, not the lessee, per the terms of the lease contract.
I found those, but none of them had replacement coverage, as you noted. And, the responses were mixed. Some people (not leasing from BMW and insured by certain insurance companies) shared their stories, how bank got the check and then issued a refund to them for whatever was paid bank over the amount due. Others suggested unfortunate BMW driver to take his grievance to small claims court to get what was due to him after bank collected more than it was entitled to. Still others basically told OP he was screwed and that’s how it goes. So, there was no consensus on the matter.
But I am not asking about that type of scenario, where someone had full coverage and insurance paid full market value to bank while market value of totaled car was above pay-off quote to settle the claim.
I am curious how would all this work if the car had replacement coverage instead.
Youre being charged for it, but your insurer specifically says it doesnt apply to leases, so you most likely are paying for nothing.
As i mentioned several times, different leases have different terms in regards to who gets the equity.
It likely wouldn’t. It also doesnt make any sense that it would. How is an insurance company going to persuade an owner of a vehicle to take a collateral trade that requires them to sell their new asset at significsntly below their agreed value? At different rates? Etc. Logisticslly it doesnt make sense for a lease.
2 Likes
No, I think just dislikes the GLE (and even mentions it in an VW Atlas [!!!] thread).
For the moderators and trusted hackers (and @michael and @littleviolette), is there anyway to create a new thread specifically for all of @Eric51 erroneous posts and then to put all of those posts and everyone else’s responses there? This poster has seriously derailed multiple and
I seriously started ignoring this posters about 5 hrs after I read their very first post, and the ignore doesn’t work well in this situation b/c I’m still seeing everyone else’s response to try to correct all the bad information. The UX options for any forum aren’t powerful enough for, “Ignore all posts by ‘X’ and all responses to ‘X’.”
If their posts are all put into their own thread, then I can just not click on that thread and can con’t to enjoy the forum. And anyone who wants to respond to Eric51 or create a meme can just do it there.
Thanks for considering.
3 Likes
Imagine an agent that collects more premiums for something that doesn’t apply to your situation. Welcome to the twilight zone
Youre being charged for it, but your insurer specifically says it doesnt apply to leases, so you most likely are paying for nothing.
Travelers have been good to me so far. If one of their reps screwed up and sold me useless policy, my agent or Travelers (when I call them Monday) will take care of it and remove the coverage with full refund. I will find someone there who actually knows and understands how coverages work, may be this will have to be looked at by underwriter to get precise answer.
As i mentioned several times, different leases have different terms in regards to who gets the equity.
Of course. So, you agree that it’s not written in stone. Policies and coverages vary, even in ‘full coverage’ situations.
It likely wouldn’t. It also doesnt make any sense that it would. How is an insurance company going to persuade an owner of a vehicle to take a collateral trade that requires them to sell their new asset at significsntly below their agreed value? At different rates? Etc. Logisticslly it doesnt make sense for a lease.
I will speculate here until I have an update from my underwriter, but for the sake of argument: why do you think this just can’t work, even in theory? All bank cares about is getting the money. Now, suppose you kept paying your bank your monthly lease dues while your car was totaled and your insurance was paying for your rental ride. Why couldn’t insurance just arrange to get a brand new car for you at a Porsche dealer, who could simply re-write a paperwork for a new car, keeping your old terms (monthly payments and RV) in-tact?
The worst case scenario: insurance could pay bank whatever it claimed it was entitled to, it surely wouldn’t be entitled to full replacement cost of the used vehicle with the brand new one. Or would it? Should insurance company (treating bank as car’s owner) issue them a check for full replacement cost, and bank refuses to cut me my portion as a refund (which I paid a premium for , over and above the full coverage) , why couldn’t I take the bank to small or large claims court (depending on amount in contest), show judge my contract , tell my story and get what I was owed?
I am curious why you think replacement coverage for leased vehicle is impossible by definition?
Hey hey hey… Stoppppp
2 Likes