One reason not to go with the minimum is that you have more coverage if you ever need it. I personally have $1M UM/UIM on my auto insurance and $1M UM/UIM as part of my umbrella.I spoke with a personal injury attorney about this one, pressing on why I would care about UM/UIM at all if my car isn't awfully expensive to replace and I have great health coverage. Their answer related to pain/suffering, disability, buildout of home accommodations in the case of disability, etc. As they put it, if you're hit and the driver is UM/UIM you can effectively sue yourself as if suing them for liability. While noting the bias of a PI attorney, I found the argument sufficiently persuasive to pay extra for American Family to "attach" my umbrella to my UM/UIM.That last part doesnt make sense to me. UIM pays damage to the insured person. Umbrella is to pay damages to others.
The reason I'm here is this, though: I'm wondering if there's any reason that I wouldn't want the minimum-to-be-umbrella-compatible UM/UIM insurance on my auto policy itself. For my standard coverage I needed 250/500 to hit umbrella minimums, but there don't seem to be umbrella minimums for UM/UIM so I went with 50/100. My broker has been in the industry for ages across multiple companies and said she'd never seen anyone with umbrella attachment do that, which makes me wonder if it's me or them that's wilding
Statistics: Posted by cubs1999 — Sun Jun 23, 2024 2:03 am