No, certainly not just you, although we are a minority. Voted )
1 Like
Surely it can’t be literally zero? If the dealer offered you insurance for $25 that would reimburse you the $5k, you’d pass?
1 Like
Choose the closest value, I guess.
1 Like
But if i don’t put 5k down & not buy in the insurance, I’d have $5,025.
4 Likes
Tough poll because I’m paying the premium for more than simply protecting myself against a loss of the down payment. That money down could be working for me in the market, a modest 5% return yields $950 over three years. Additionally, putting $0 DAS gives me more flexibility with lease swaps.
1 Like
Isnt this concept like how much would you pay for GAP?
Not necessarily, GAP coverage protects against unknown (somewhat estimate-able) loss, where here the loss is avoidable & capped.
How much extra are you willing to pay to insure against the risk of losing a $5,000 down payment on a 3-year lease?
How does GAP protect one from losing down payment? I thought GAP only pays the difference between loan balance (which already excluded the down payment) and the car’s value?
So unless they paid the amount of (loan balance + down payment), wouldn’t the down payment still considered being lost?
No one is talking about gap. The hypothetical cost here is in the form of extra rent charge.
1 Like
Then I don’t understand the poll, how one can hedge the risk of losing down payment with insurance cost?
The extra rent charge is the “insurance” cost.
The point is that by doing a zero das lease rather than making that $5k cap cost reduction, you’re paying, in the form of extra rent charge, to protect your cap cost amount against being lost if the vehicle is totalled.
The point that is trying to be made is that most people wouldn’t willingly pay a large insurance payment to protect the money, when they view it through those terms.
1 Like
Ok got it, thanks for the patience 
Slightly off topic, if OP purchased the car, any excess amount his insurance pays would belong to him?
Correct.
It also does in the many lease situations where the contract dictates the excess is given to the lessee. It is not always the case where the excess goes to the lessor.
2 Likes
It’s worth something. I might go for $25, but for the purpose of the poll I’d round that down to $0 per the instructions.
THANK YOU! I’ve tried to explain this to people that repeat back to me like a parrot: THE RISK IS TOO HIGH, THE RISK IS TOO HIGH.
No, it is not. Chances of a car being totaled are too low to prevent me from sleeping at sleeping at night for three years.
Also, I’m done having this conversation with my wife. If she wants me to have a car that costs less than x per month, my queen will get that 
1 Like
Right, and on top of that she would want exact car and specs for exact $ per months… which won’t make sense since it’s $$$ per months
Haha I must admit that she did say they blue that I picked was hideous. Too bright to her liking. But nothing beyond that, and no push back either.
The only big item for her was payment per month, and I obliged.
I miss the pre ‘chip shortage’ lease hacker
5 Likes
A lot of opinions here and we all know opinions are like…
Your money probably isn’t gone unless you didn’t get a decent deal.
The insurance company appraises the vehicle and settles with the leasing company. You have zero involvement in that.
If the simple math determines the amount of the settlement is greater than what you are into the car for they will either send you the difference or you glide the lease over to another vehicle.
What you want is a dealer transfer/substitution of collateral.
I had a vehicle get totaled early in the lease that had an insane number of rebates when I leased it that amounted to something like an $8000 surplus to me after the insurance paid out.
Thank you so much, lovest comment so far.