Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

pixel_of_moral_decay t1_j1k4785 wrote

Reply to comment by salajander in Should we sell our car? by hourlongflyer

Either way is irrelevant. You always pay partially based on usage. That’s always factored in.

But someone who had a period of inactivity is going to be a higher risk. Lapsed insurance or license = higher odds of crashing

−1

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_j1siikx wrote

One could just as easily argue that someone constantly driving is at a higher risk of crashing due to fatigue and complacency

0

pixel_of_moral_decay t1_j1sk969 wrote

There’s data behind all of this. Commercial drivers have by far the fewest accidents per mile. It’s not even close.

Likewise, rental cars are about as risky as drunk drivers since so many of them rarely drive. The most likely class of vehicle to kill you in a collision is a rental. Least likely is a truck.

1

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_j1socko wrote

But how many do they have total? End of the day, the total is what determines how often the insurance company is paying.

1

pixel_of_moral_decay t1_j1spvqe wrote

Are you really that dumb? You pay based on avg usage and types of driving. You also get rates increased if you get in an accident.

You clearly have never paid for insurance before or you’d know how stupid your argument is, given the first questions you answer are exactly that.

But from mile 0, and per mile, someone who rarely drives will be the biggest burden. That’s just math.

1