| Message |
Author |
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 6:18 pm Post subject: Difference between stacked and unstacked coverage |
|
|
| With uninsured motorist insurance what is the differtent between stacked and unstacked? |
|
charlesBender
New member
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Posts: 1
1.30 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2007 2:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Stacked coverage means that you may combine the coverage limits for each automobile insured under your policy. For example, you may insure three autos and obtain stacked coverage with limits of $10,000 per person and $20,000 per accident for each auto (known as 10/20 limits). Your stacked, or combined, coverage will total $30,000 per person and $60,000 per accident. If the coverage was unstacked, then the limit of coverage for each vehicle would be $10,000 per person and $20,000 per accident. Insurance companies may offer unstacked coverage at a reduced cost, since they will only pay the maximum amount allowed for one insured automobile. What state are you in? |
|
beebee
New member
Joined: 04 Nov 2007
Posts: 4
2.61 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2007 6:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Normally the coverage limit defined in the UM policy applies to each vehicle enlisted under the policy. Now if you are allowed (many states don't allow this) to stack the policy you will then be able to collect the compensation from all the vehicles in the policy. I hope it is already clear to you ‘how the coverage multiplies' from my previous posters example.
Stacked UM coverage may come handy if the loss amount exceeds the limit of coverage on a single car. You can then gain full coverage under the UM policy. let me present that with an example.
Suppose, the UM coverage level available on a single car is 10/20 but you have sustained total loss of $15,000 in an accident. Under normal circumstances, you are supposed to pay the remaining $5,000 form your pocket. Staked UM coverage, however, saves you from this. It will cover the total loss of $15,000.
Rupert |
|
RupertWBradson
Senior member
Joined: 05 Jul 2007
Posts: 703
131.50 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2007 6:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
If you ask for my honest opinion, I would rather prefer staking UM coverage. Agree, it is expensive but at times wise. Even the latest data suggest that about 30% of the motorists in US drive without coverage. Therefore, if you become a victim of an accident and to your horror discover that the other driver doesn't carry the auto policy, you have no option other than filing the claim with your carrier. Staking UM coverage obviously pays off if the loss amount is greater than the coverage limit available on the vehicle. However, you can stack your vehicle insurance coverage only if you own more than one vehicle.
_________________
Register Now to have your Insurance queries solved. |
|
Dazzlingdiamond
Guest
|
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2007 11:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Couple of points....All states do not allow stacking...some that do have the following exclusion. The vehicles must be on the same 'policy' meaning if husband and wife (lets say), in same household have different policys, (lets say they just married and didn't change to the 'same one, same company, but different policys), then stacking can be excluded.
I haven't heard of paying an additional premium that would allow stacking, not that this may not be true, I just haven't heard of it. The way I've always understood it is the above, and either your state allows it or it doesn't. Another point, most states that allow UM stacking also allow UIM (Under Insured Motorist), stacking, assuming of course you have the coverage. |
|
Lori
Moderator
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 8173
Location: Missouri
287.90 Dollars($)
|
|
