Poll: What type of Insurance Coverage?

[artguy]

What type of insurance Coverage to you have on your bimmer?

EDIT: Quick Poll Definitions:

Full Coverage = should be self explanitory. Would cover damage to car, injuries to passengers, liabilities, etc.

Liability Only = refers to the most basic insurance you can get to drive the car. This is called many, many different things from state to state and country to country.

[whiskychaser]

Not sure what liability only is. You used to be able to get Road Traffic Act insurance in the UK but that what the bare minimum. These days third party, fire and theft or fully comprehensive are the norm. The difference being in a third party accident your car doesnt get fixed. I have fully comp plus driver's legal protection plus protected no claims. Its about £10 more than third party fire and theft but unfortunately I'm past my 21st birthday

[repenttokyo]

quebec is radically different from anywhere else in north america in terms of insurance coverage. If I have an accident anywehre in north america, it's impossible for me to be sued for personal injury or any other reason - i'm protected by the quebec government.

[attack eagle]

I have liability and non insured motorist coverage at the moment.

Contemplating upgrading to comprehensive and adding extra coverage for non-stock wheels & tires, but probably won't do that until after I install a 2way aftermarket alarm as the discount should just about pay for the upgrade.

[winfred]

liability on the e30 and sol when it got popped, i may upgrade coverage for the truck and da shark

[Barney Paull-Edwards]

Canadian insurance sounds sensible,personal liability is a financial killer if you travel,cost me more than car cover for Eastern Europe,as for russia,$230 a day!

[Herb]

I have full for the e34 because I drive it everyday and if anything where to happen to it it won't be a total loss.

[ryan roopnarine]

quebec is radically different from anywhere else in north america in terms of insurance coverage. If I have an accident anywehre in north america, it's impossible for me to be sued for personal injury or any other reason - i'm protected by the quebec government.

how do you figure this? what prevents someone, in the us, for example, from suing your insurance company (provincial in this case) for the full amount of your coverage, and not suing you for an additional amount?

[repenttokyo]

how do you figure this? what prevents someone, in the us, for example, from suing your insurance company (provincial in this case) for the full amount of your coverage, and not suing you for an additional amount?

you can't sure my insurance company for personal injury, because they don't cover me for personal injury...you can't sue me because I am protected legally by my provincial government. In quebec, there is no legal concept of civil damages for injury as the result of a car accident, and there is no tort law for car accidents - it's called no fault insurance. What you would have to do is prove to the Quebec government that you lost work and wages as a result of your injury, and they will compensate you for that work and wages. I think there is also a provision for dismemberment. But you can't sue for damages. The province decides how much, if any, "pain and suffering" money is to be paid out after an evaluation. Everyone in the province is covered by the government as part of their license fees.

This system keeps thousands of personal injury suits out of the courts and saves millions of dollars in lawyer fees and court costs.

Here's an article on one person's opinion on why this no fault plan has not been adopted by any US states: http://www.law.berkeley.edu/faculty/.../Quebec309.htm

[ryan roopnarine]

i'm really trying not to be mean here, but quebec law doesn't really apply outside of quebec. that link does not address my concern. there's nothing that quebec can do (outside of quebec, of course) that prevents someone in, say michigan, from suing you personally in michigan court for an accident that happened in michigan. civil law in the us does not allow for that, in the same way that you probably couldn't "sue" the us federal government for money in the us, but you probably could in a canadian court. whether or not your insurance provider will pay certain damages is one thing, but saying that an individual (say the michiganer) can not sue you personally for the typical quantification of pain and suffering in an american court is not correct. please see the piper aircraft example in this document for a discussion of this.
http://www.nexsenpruet.com/assets/attachments/79.pdf

if a quebec court was unwilling to handle a pain and suffering lawsuit, all that the michiganer would have to do is file a lawsuit in an appropriate court, have you served, and let stew.....in the event that (they) won, quebec might have codified laws that allow you to ignore payment of a judgement, but the michigan court can certainly see to it that any holdings, property, bank accounts &c &c in the us are used to satisfy the judgement. you may or may not have any assets in the us, so that might be an academic exercise in yoru instance.