Quote:
Originally Posted by Do0rDoNot
In my jurisdiction if there is any lapse in insurance even if you don't have a car, your premiums will go up next time you get insurance. Just another reason the insurance industry is a giant racket.
Don't cancel your insurance until you're certain this won't happen
This is what I've been trying to explain to people. My situation is unique in the fact I wont be getting a new vehicle for now. That is why I specifically read up on not having insurance coverage and had the Progressive agent run that scenario through their system of what would happen if I stopped my coverage and then further down the line got coverage.
This is a direct quote from nerdwallet.com: "Want to maintain continuous auto insurance coverage: This can help save money on car insurance later. Going without coverage — even when between cars — can make you look risky in the eyes of insurers, which can lead to higher rates when you buy a vehicle."
And from thesimpledollar.com: "If you’re only going to be without a personal car temporarily, a non-owner policy is an affordable way to make sure that a lapse in insurance coverage doesn’t mean you end up paying a higher rate for regular insurance when you do purchase a car."
I have this feeling that I'm in one of those spots that whatever decision I make, it will probably be the wrong one. I wouldnt sweat it that much but as you might have guessed from me owning a 1996 vehicle, I'm not the wealthiest person around and this decision does potentially involve thousands of dollars (depending when I get a new vehicle), so I want to try to make the best decision that I possibly can.....But what is making it difficult is getting conflicting advice.