Thought these we're optional extras as in perks sold by your own insurance company?
Printable View
I have to disagree with this part of the post. It should read comprehensive insurance is a necessity. what if some 17yo P plater rear ends you in the wet on your brand new accord, and not having comprehensive, you are pretty much well and truly screwed. because they wont be able to pay up the damages. whereas with comprehensive, you pass the buck to the insurance company, and they can deal it out amongst themselves.
I think what he meant was 3rd Party property damage insurance, not 3rd party CTP.
and I agree with that, 3rd party property damange should be compulsory to protect other drivers on the road. If one can't afford the insurances, then one needs to asesses if they can even afford to drive.
now i got you! i thought there was two types, third party and comprehensive only.
fair point you got there. i guess one thing everyone can agree on is; get third party property damage. no matter how "poor" you may be,
I keep thinking third party property is compulsary... Doesn't rego include a bit of third party?
I have made it a thing to always have at least third party property on my cars... stupid to not have insurance on your car. Never know when some idiot will run into you, and ruin your work, or even when you'll lose control and hit somebody. You'd be stupid not to have insurance, imo.