Here is my situation. My car got stolen in late July. My insurance policy is up for renewal. I talked to my insurance company about getting a non-owner policy since I dont have a vehicle and do not want a lapse in coverage (my current insurance company said my rate would almost double per year if I have a lapse in coverage). And that doubling per year doesnt factor in me buying a newer vehicle, so the hit I would be taking would be even more significant.

Everything I read said that non-owner policy rates would be significantly less than a regular car insurance policy. However, my insurance company quoted me a rate that was 20% higher for a non-owner policy than what my renewal would be for my car. I asked them why and it was because under this coverage, I could drive anyones vehicle more risk with more unknowns.

So here are my 4 options:
1. Drop coverage. I have no idea when I'll be getting a new vehicle, but it more than likely will be at least a year. Then I would have to pay significantly higher rates going forward for an indeterminate amount of time.
2. Continue my current policy for a vehicle I dont have. Talked to my insurance company they said they are totally fine with that.
3. Get non-owner coverage at a rate 20% higher than my current policy. This makes zero sense so I've already ruled this out.
4. Shop around for a cheaper non-owner policy....the issue with that is I already know my current carrier is the cheapest for what was my vehicle, so I'd probably be wasting time by shopping around and when I do get a new vehicle, I'd just end up right back with my current carrier anyway. Because this is more of a specialized policy, I'd have to call around to multiple companies, which would basically eat up any savings I might get because of the time value it's costing me.

I guess this turned into more of a venting post than anything else because in essence what I"m doing if I continue my policy is paying protection money so my rates dont go up. However, I just feel I'm kind of stuck in a no win situation, mainly because I dont know when I'll be getting a new vehicle.

Anyway, if anyone has any better ideas than option #2, I'm all ears.

You are almost certainly being dicked around. Are you speaking directly with your insurer or a rep/agent that is exclusive to the carrier? That could explain why this sounds so wacky. Auto insurance premium should not double if you don't have a policy for a while.

"Lapse" is somewhat of a special term in insurance speak -- it implies that you simply didn't pay your premium on renewal and the carrier had to cancel you for non-pay. This is very bad and could heavily impact your premium, and could be a source of confusion between you and your carrier.

Here's what I'd do: proactively cancel your policy because you no longer have a vehicle. As you mentioned this is specialized coverage, you should find an Independent Agent when you get a vehicle and need insurance. IAs have relationships with a bunch of different carriers at their fingertips and do the shopping for you efficiently, so you don't have to deal with each company 1-to-1.

1. I was speaking directly with my insurance company.
2. According to my insurance company, my rate would go up by about 70% if I stopped coverage and restarted at a later date (a licensed rep ran that scenario through their system under the assumption I would be insuring the same vehicle). And it's not just my insurance company that is saying this....I've read several sources online that say the same thing. If you do a google search you'll find the same info. So both the insurance company and multiple sources online are wrong? That's where I originally got the idea that I just cant cancel my insurance policy because I dont have a vehicle. Believe me, I thought it was no big deal just to cancel my insurance because I dont have a vehicle. Of all the web sources I've read, NONE suggest what you are saying and just cancel your auto insurance.

I'm not saying you are wrong and they are right, but I'm talking like 10 different sources online are saying I should have continuous coverage to avoid getting my rates jacked up once I get a vehicle. That is hard to ignore.

Did you have liability only on the policy? If not, why not use the payment for total theft and purchase new vehicle for policy to renew. If you have comp coverage and the loss was in July and they haven't paid you what else is going on with the claim?

They’re lying to you because they don’t want you to drop your coverage. I’ve had a period without insurance and went back albeit to another company and premiums were actually cheaper. Just drop your insurance and pick it back up when you get a car. If they really are double go to another company they’re all within 15%and they won’t care about the lapse for a reason like this if they even ask.

yes the sources are wrong. The reason why the premiums go up in that situation is because an uninsured car getting reinsured is higher risk then a previously insured car. This is because people wait until something is wrong with the car and then get it insured. Even though they require reinspection it still is higher risk and misses things. A new car getting insured on a new policy is not equivalent.

Pure speculation:

If your car was stolen and not recovered by police after a few days that sucker has gone to a chop shop and no longer exists. Drop coverage immediately, and do not give any more business to that company, because they're bull****ting you, probably in more ways than one. Non owner policy sounds like something you'd get in a super unique situation, but this is not that situation. Whoever you were talking to seems like he just bull****ted you about every option you had and tried to justify that bull**** because you aren't seeing through it and calling them out on it. You also made some assumptions in OP that may actually be completely incorrect and possibly the reverse is true. You don't like the price quotes you got, shop around immed. You have no idea what other companies will tell you. An earlier post said find an agent. I'd do that. Everyone's got a friend trying to sell them insurance. If you trust they have your back, use them. Or hunt for a reputable one you think you can trust. Also, you said you won't buy a car for at least a year. Why would you pay any insurance at all? Are you gonna be borrowing other people's cars? Taking public transpo? I don't think you'll need insurance for either, it makes no sense to do so imo

Hello, I'm an independent insurance agency owner for about 8 years. If the non-owners is higher, they are most likely factoring the vehicle theft claim loss into the premium/cost. There is no way a full coverage insurance policy should cost less than a non-owners policy, unless there is major claims activity/MVR activity and the non-owners is quoted as a new policy, factoring in these variables, and your existing auto policy has not (this claim would not be surcharged until your next renewal).

Non-owners policies are not offered through every insurance carrier. We represent a few companies that do write them, Progressive and Foremost (owned by Farmers). I'd encourage you to reach out to an independent agency who represents more than more insurance company (unlike captive agencies ex: State Farm, Allstate). Or contact Progressive directly. Good luck hope this helps some.

drop the insurance
they're lying through their teeth to get you to buy a policy for a car you dont even have anymore.
think about it-you're willing to continue to pay insurance when you dont even own a car to avoid a hypothetical insurance hike if/when you get another car? that makes zero sense.

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

I second this wholeheartedly. Deal with an independent agent that works with as many companies as possible.

I am with Progressive and they did in fact quote me a higher price for non-owner car insurance. I did not make a claim for my stolen car for one obvious reason...I did not have comp on my 1996 vehicle. And please lets not get into a discussion about that. Nor have I had any claims whatsoever since starting my insurance with them in April 2018 (or in the last 20 years w my previous insurer). I even called back and spoke to another rep who gave me the exact same info. And of course I questioned all of this. The rep put me on hold to get a better explanation and came back on and stated the reason the non owner policy was more is because of unknown factors ie the vehicle I'd be driving, how often, etc. I can only go so far in a discussion with these people because nothing I say to them is going to change the fact they are going to charge me more.

I did attempt to get a quote through State Farm for non-owner, but that rep never called me back after I gave him all my info.

So I'm still in the process of making a decision as my renewal is approaching. Now I'm leaning towards just cancelling my auto insurance outright.......

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.

I've read about some additional companies that supposedly offer non owner policies like GEICO, Nationwide, The General, and Titan. I think I'll try calling them along with Foremost next and see what they say as well.

Just call these guys:

http://www.sundanceinsurance.com/independent-agent

Thank you for all the input. I dont believe this myself, but today, over 2 months after my car was stolen, I get a call from the LVPD saying they recovered my vehicle and it's now back in my possession. Whether that is actually a good or bad thing is a different story......

I mean my insurance company doesn't offer non-owner policies. As stupid as it sounds. If you can find one that does, by all means. However, I've been driving for 20 years with zero accidents and I had a one year lapse in my insurance because I didn't know this and my insurance premium nearly doubled. It's a giant racket, but you can't change the system so be smart about it, even if it means paying for insurance on a car you don't even own. Go with basic liability, lower to PLPD from comprehensive if you have it, etc.

Good luck.


Just saw this. Glad they found your car. Keep the advice in mind if you ever encounter that situation again. The only thing worse than paying for bull**** insurance is paying double for it.

Wow, congrats! Where was it found and what condition is it in now?

Just putting this note here for someone who might read the thread in the future...weird situation but if what you said were true I would try Geico or USAA and tell them you want the rate for when your car is in storage, then the rate will be much less.

It was found in a Walgreens parking lot about 1 mile from where it was stolen. Well, they stole the battery and the starter was broke. I'm guessing that is why they abandoned it. I replaced the battery and the starter, so it is running. However, they tried and failed to pry the stereo out so that is all messed up. And now the AC doesnt work for some reason so I'll have to have that looked at.
So it is a bittersweet recovery. I had gotten accustomed to not having a vehicle for the most part. Now I have this money pit of an old vehicle back that I have to dump even more money into now after already spending money for towing/repairs. If I was thinking clearly at the time I was notified of the recovery, I probably just should have told the tow yard to keep the vehicle or tried to sell it to them.....