[dragnet2]

But, like several people have mentioned, many insurances offer a discount if you're traveling for a while, or have other reasons to where you won't be driving the car at all.

Millions of people through no fault of their own have reduced their driving 90+ percent. It should not be up to millions of individuals to start changing their policies. That would be a logistic nightmare. For example, I still have nearly a full tank of gas in my vehicle for the past 4+ weeks. My point is since this crisis is not due to our actions, the insurance companies ought to reduce premiums to match the restricted directives of staying at home, and avoid all unnecessary travel.

What I find amazing here, is some folks on their thread seem to want to protect this behemoth insurance companies regardless of this crisis and the directives to stay at home and avoid all unnecessary travel.

The insurance companies fully understand all this. It's like paying for 135 cable channels and then being told you can only use 10 of them, yet you're still being billed for 135 channels. That's BS.

[chuck allen]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/allstate-to-return-dollar600-million-in-auto-premiums-as-pandemic-cuts-driving/ar-BB12dUIE

Allstate to return $600 Million in auto premiums over virus

[Svartalfiar]

Millions of people through no fault of their own have reduced their driving 90+ percent. It should not be up to millions of individuals to start changing their policies. That would be a logistic nightmare. For example, I still have nearly a full tank of gas in my vehicle for the past 4+ weeks. My point is since this crisis is not due to our actions, the insurance companies ought to reduce premiums to match the restricted directives of staying at home, and avoid all unnecessary travel.

And why would they do this? First, reduced mileage doesn't lower your rate that much - find an online estimator and try the same policy with 5M miles, then try with 15M miles. You really don't save that much. And a temporary suspension (for travel or stuff) is, if your company offers it, intended for times when you will be doing zero driving for a while.
But why is it the insurance company's job to figure out which of their policyholders are reducing driving, and which ones aren't? That would be even more of a logistical nightmare than each individual simply changing their yearly mileage estimate. They offer a policy based on the information you give them, including that mileage number. If YOU change your mileage, YOU should be the one to initiate a change in policy.
This crises isn't due to the insurance companies' actions either - why would they be responsible? Same logic goes both ways.


The insurance companies fully understand all this. It's like paying for 135 cable channels and then being told you can only use 10 of them, yet you're still being billed for 135 channels. That's BS.

In which case you call your TV company and complain and they (eventually) give you a credit. But this situation isn't the same, it's more like your regular TV bill: you pay for 135 channels up front, it's not their fault if you only choose to watch ten of them.

(Yes, I think TV channels should be a-la-carte, but that discussion is irrelevant to the current one. )