May 9th, 2008


Wow, the insurance industry is corrupt.

So, I talked to my auto insurance agent about the fact that I sold my car. She wanted to send an insurance cancellation policy, but I pointed out that I was looking for options to continue coverage, but not have it attached to the car I have sold (as a "just in case" measure, so that nothing involved with that car is my responsibility). The conversation went something like this:

agent: Why would you want to continue coverage when you don't own a car?
me: Because I've had the issue in the past where it is considered a "lapse in policy" even though I didn't own a car in the interim.
agent: Oh, that doesn't make sense. If you don't own a car, why would you need coverage?
me: I didn't think it made sense either, but it bit me before, so I'm trying to protect myself now.
agent: Let me contact the underwriter and see what we can do.
[time passes, agent calls back.]
agent: Wow, you are right. They will penalize you for the lapse in coverage, but there is no way to fill that gap unless you're on someone else's policy.

So, yes, I have confirmation that the insurance industry penalizes you for a lapse of insurance, DESPITE NOT HAVING A CAR TO PUT IT ON. Is that messed up or what?
  • Current Mood
    quixotic quixotic