Do you get car rental insurance?

[fotze2]

Not having girls and having to deal with crispy socks actually sound better than buying a moonswatch. Wtf is a moons watch

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by fotze2

Not having girls and having to deal with crispy socks actually sound better than buying a moonswatch. Wtf is a moons watch

Omega and a Swatch all in one.

Omega to be classy and Swatch to relive the 80s.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

You got her the Murph? Ultra cool watch.

Haha yep. Comes in 38mm now. The wait for her last exam is killing me. Was tempting to give it to her after her grad ceremony, but I want to wait until she's completely done.

[GoinAllTheWay]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

No. Never.

I have a SEF27 endorsement added to my car insurance that I use instead and if not for that, I'd use a credit card to rent a car that has car rental coverage. (Currently both)

The SEF 27 endorsement is pretty cheap. I think it's an extra $20-30 a year or something extra to a normal SEF 20 endorsement? That's like a single day of rental car coverage offering or something. Everyone calls it the car rental clause, but after reading into it, it's actually more powerful than that or a credit card coverage.

It applies towards any vehicle the insured were using that is not their own, even friends and family vehicles or test driving vehicles.

This is pretty close but a couple things to clarify:
SEF 20 is loss of use coverage. It covers the "reasonable cost" of a rental car if your vehicle is laid up due to an insurable claim up to the limit of the endorsement, usually $1500.


SEF 27 is Legal Liability for non owned vehicles and while the name implies it, I've never once in my career heard of the 27 being used to cover a friends vehicle. The policy follows the vehicle, not the driver. You loan your vehicle, you're loaning your policy as well. Another thing to consider is the limit of SEF27, check yours. They can be as low as 30k Canadian MSRP which is better than nothing but it should be much higher than that. The difference between a $30k limit and $75k is minimal. 27 applies in Canada and USA only. Renting a car anywhere else (including Mexico) requires an alternative such as a credit card.

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

This is pretty close but a couple things to clarify:
SEF 20 is loss of use coverage. It covers the "reasonable cost" of a rental car if your vehicle is laid up due to an insurable claim up to the limit of the endorsement, usually $1500.


SEF 27 is Legal Liability for non owned vehicles and while the name implies it, I've never once in my career heard of the 27 being used to cover a friends vehicle. The policy follows the vehicle, not the driver. You loan your vehicle, you're loaning your policy as well. Another thing to consider is the limit of SEF27, check yours. They can be as low as 30k Canadian MSRP which is better than nothing but it should be much higher than that. The difference between a $30k limit and $75k is minimal. 27 applies in Canada and USA only. Renting a car anywhere else (including Mexico) requires an alternative such as a credit card.

If there's an error in understanding, I'd love to get it clarified before #### hits the fan due to incorrect application due to misunderstanding. Clarifying the Canada/USA factor was helpful. Thanks. I hadn't noticed it previously because it was in fine print. Excellent to know. Your post had be intrigued, so I poked into the situation during my lunch hour.

I'm quite certain that the SEF 27 policy was described to me as a sort of back up where I could apply my own vehicle insurance to a vehicle (optional) to one I do not own (not just rentals). Friend's borrowing my vehicle are covered under my regular insurance, as long as they don't borrow it with enough frequency that they should be named in my policy. I know SEF 20 is different than SEF 27. I'm just saying it looks like it's something that I seem to have to have before I can add SEF 27.

Everything described in the links below though seems consistent to what my broker told me.

This link has the most explanation online for SEF27: resulting from damage caused to vehicles of which named insured is not owner. The blog is from a company in Quebec. No idea if this affects anything. Limit loss is mentioned, but no details on limit loss. Does explicitly say it's vehicle you don't own, not just rentals.
https://infoassurance.ca/en/blog/aut...ou-do-not-own/

This link does mention that the SEF 27 clause is useful for Canada US only. So it was a good reminder. It mentions limit loss is based on limits of the coverage on the insurance policy, which I think is a good thing to be aware of. Mentions applying your insurance policy to a rental vehicle, doesn't mention other instances where you don't own the vehicle, but the link does seem to imply the post is a specific response about car rentals.
https://www.brokerlink.ca/blog/car-rentals-and-sef-27

This link specifically highlights Ontario and Alberta and differentiates a OPCF 27: Liability for Damage to Non-Owned Automobile(s) and SEF 27: Legal Liability for Damage to Non-Owned Automobile. Says it's same coverage you have, but on a vehicle you don't own. Also has the reminder it's for Canada/US only. Never heard of this clause, but the OPCF 27 endorsement says coverage limit to $25-50K. No mention of limit for SEF 27. I'd assume it's because SEF 27 as mentioned in another link can vary based on your coverage on your vehicle.
https://rates.ca/resources/auto-insu...ntario-alberta

My policy says this:

AB-S.E.F. No. 27
Legal Liability for Damage to Non-Owned Automobile Endorsement
In consideration of the premium charged, as set out in the Policy or in the Certificate of Automobile Insurance, the Insurer
agrees:
(a) Where the Insured is an individual or individuals, to indemnify the Insured, the Insured’s spouse/adult
interdependent partner and all drivers listed in the Policy;
(b) Where the Insured is a corporation, unincorporated association, partnership or other entity, to indemnify all
individuals named below and the spouse/adult interdependent partner of each,
against the liability imposed by law or assumed under any written agreement for loss or damage arising from the care, custody or control of any automobile including its equipment and resulting from loss or damage caused by a peril
specified below.

Insuring Agreements
Section C: Loss of or Damage to Non-owned Automobiles
SPF #1 Perils Deductible
Subsection
1. All Perils
2. Collision or Upset $500 * 3. Comprehensive $250 * 4. Specified Perils
*A deductible applies on each claim, except for loss or damage caused by fire, lightning or by theft of the entire automobile.

Provided that: 1. The perils for which indemnity is provided in this endorsement are as described in Section C of the Policy;
2. The indemnity provided by this endorsement applies only to an automobile of the private passenger type(s) or only
with respect to automobiles in the Insured’s care, custody or control in connection with the Insured’s business of
- as declared -;
3. The Insurer shall not be liable for loss or damage
a. to any automobile which is owned or licensed in the name of any person insured by this endorsement or any
person residing in the same dwelling premises as that person; or
b. to any automobile which is owned or leased by the employer of these persons; or
c. to any “Customer’s Automobile” as defined in 8(b) of the General Provisions, Definitions and Exclusions of
the Standard Garage Automobile Policy (SPF #4);
4. Where applicable to the coverage provided by this endorsement, the Additional Agreements of Insurer under
Section A - Third Party Liability of the Policy shall apply to this endorsement;
5. The Insurer shall not be liable under this endorsement for any amount in excess of $75,000 for any one occurrence, exclusive of amounts under provision 4 above;
6. Such automobile is being used with the consent of the owner or lessee.
Except as otherwise provided in this endorsement, all limits, terms, conditions, provisions, definitions and exclusions of
the Policy shall have full force and effect.

So, my understanding is now the following:
- SEF 27 clause may have slight variations from province to province. It may not be ubiquitous wording from province to province which could cause slight variations (ie: coverage limits), but the major parts should be identical.
- SEF 27 coverage can vary within province and person to person depending on the details of their insurance agreement/vehicle(s) insured with their insurance provider.
- SEF 27 applies to Canada/USA only.
- SEF 27 is applying the insurance coverage for those named in the agreement to another vehicle not owned by those named in the agreement... with minor
- SEF 27 makes reference to section A - third party liability, but has a limitation of $75K (in my instance) for any one occurrence.


The last one is the interesting part I'll probably contact my broker later this summer to clarify. Section A has a limit (Normally) around 1-2 million bucks ish (ie: Even on the credit card rental clauses I've read). It includes property damage and bodily injury. I assume it might mean that if a single "invoice" is over $75K it maxes out? Doesn't totally seem like it's supposed to be $75K total... so worth clarifying if multiple instances under $75K are OK would be quite important.

That would make sense in terms of a limitation of $75K (in my case) for a single item like a vehicle. But I'm actually not as concerned about that now. I'm wondering if the max is still the full million or whatever as long as individual items are capped at $75K because some of those might easily be in excess of the vehicle. I'm more concerned about the bodily injury clause and clarifying property damage such as if you were sued for injury to someone/death whether that too is capped at $75K or if hitting some property that takes $100-200K to fix. I've always assumed SEF 27 was an either or clause and doesn't stack with any other coverages (ie: excess on primary coverage cannot be dealt with by another coverage or endorsement), but it'll be good to get clarification on that.

Clarifying how different coverages interact with each other (stack or not/highest coverage option you have available only) and other limitations/variations could explain why the SEF27 coverage vs the rental option ones vary so ridiculously in price. That way it'll be easier to clarify what coverage one might have, whether what someone has is adequate or if topping up (or if it's even possible to top up) is appropriate on a case by case basis.

[GoinAllTheWay]

AB-S.E.F. No. 27
Legal Liability for Damage to Non-Owned Automobile Endorsement
In consideration of the premium charged, as set out in the Policy or in the Certificate of Automobile Insurance, the Insurer
agrees:
(a) Where the Insured is an individual or individuals, to indemnify the Insured, the Insured’s spouse/adult
interdependent partner and all drivers listed in the Policy;
(b) Where the Insured is a corporation, unincorporated association, partnership or other entity, to indemnify all
individuals named below and the spouse/adult interdependent partner of each,
against the liability imposed by law or assumed under any written agreement for loss or damage arising from the care, custody or control of any automobile including its equipment and resulting from loss or damage caused by a peril
specified below.

I think this is the important part. There is likely no written agreement (nor would I rely on that anyways) when borrowing a friends car but there certainly is in a rental situation.

The last one is the interesting part I'll probably contact my broker later this summer to clarify. Section A has a limit (Normally) around 1-2 million bucks ish (ie: Even on the credit card rental clauses I've read). It includes property damage and bodily injury. I assume it might mean that if a single "invoice" is over $75K it maxes out? Doesn't totally seem like it's supposed to be $75K total... so worth clarifying if multiple instances under $75K are OK would be quite important.

That's with respect to liability to other people or their property. The rental car would be considered a temporary substitution of your own. It's basically being treated like it's yours. The liability limit would not be applied to physical damage to the rental vehicle. Whatever the limit of the 27 is would be the most your insurer would pay out for physical damage to the rental vehicle.



I've seen many claims involving people getting into accidents with their friends vehicle and in each instance, the payout was from the owners policy, not the borrowers regardless if the 27 is on the borrowers policy or not. I'd tread carefully assuming the SEF 27 would respond in that situation.

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

I think this is the important part. There is likely no written agreement (nor would I rely on that anyways) when borrowing a friends car but there certainly is in a rental situation.

That's with respect to liability to other people or their property. The rental car would be considered a temporary substitution of your own. It's basically being treated like it's yours. The liability limit would not be applied to physical damage to the rental vehicle. Whatever the limit of the 27 is would be the most your insurer would pay out for physical damage to the rental vehicle.

I've seen many claims involving people getting into accidents with their friends vehicle and in each instance, the payout was from the owners policy, not the borrowers regardless if the 27 is on the borrowers policy or not. I'd tread carefully assuming the SEF 27 would respond in that situation.

That's fair. I've always perceived SEF 27 to be a more secondary policy and safety net in those instances. It's more for if the policy of the friends or family vehicle was inexplicably invalid. I wouldn't be jumping out of a friend's car going, "It's OK, I have a SEF 27 endorsement!".

It's more like the absolute worst case scenario, "CC coverage didn't deal with it?/The insurance wasn't valid or appropriate? Well, thank god I have SEF 27 so I'm not out of pocket a ton of money because there were no other policies in place." It certainly would not be something like, "Oh, you haven't activated insurance after pulling it out of storage? No worries bro, I have an SEF 27 endorsement."

[activeStick]

Yeah, most credit cards have auto rental collision/loss damage waiver insurance, but I believe almost none of them have 3rd party liability coverage.

[Ryan Coke]

It was actually my insurance agent several years ago that explained sef 27 covers non-owned autos, like vehicles that you rent or borrow. Which made sense based on the description, instead of rental car coverage.

[sa226]

Anyone with recent experience renting in California? I'm seeing now that California rentals no longer include liability insurance as part of their standard contract, or if they do it's the state minimum which is not even close to enough.

Also reading anecdotal stories of some rental companies not accepting insurance from outside the US, eg. Personal Iinsurance SEF27 endorsement.

Fine with paying whatever is necessary, I just don't want to be caught unprepared in a situation where it feels like I'm getting scammed.

[ken0042]

We are going next week so I will let you know. However I do know in the past that I have had a few experiences where I've had rental agents try to tell me my Canadian insurance isn't valid. Fortunately my insurance guy is a close buddy so I can just say "let me text my insurance guy real quick."

[Andrew]

It depends on what your renting. I never do but check max coverage on credit card if fancy car (over 60k) Also I believe outside north america not covered by some cardss etc is your spouse covered etc. Lot of details. Experience with accidents in family. Credit card works. Not all trucks are covered (moving vans)

Car insurance will cover too but obviously claim on card if you have accident

[Torture]

I've only ever needed it once and just go off credit card insurance. The one time we had to file a claim we had rented a car for a self-drive safari in South Africa. All good until we got a flat. Car company says 'no problem, we'll deliver a new car to you, all you have to pay is the cost of the tire'. They swap out the car and we continue on.

Afterwards get a charge on the credit card for thousands. Get in touch and say 'wtf'. They eventually send pictures of the damage they 'found'....pictures were dated a week after we had left the country and half the bumper was hanging off. Tried to report it as a fraudulent charge to Scotiabank but they weren't having any of it ("If you sign the agreement you agreed to the rental agency charging you anything they want"....uhh...IAMNAL but I'm pretty sure that's not how it works.)

Anyways, Scotiabank wouldn't accept that it was a fraudulent charge but paid out under credit card insurance. Everybody wins except Scotiabank I guess - I get my money back and the scammy rental car agency gets their fee too. Yeesh.

[photon]

I just got back from LA and I know for sure my personal insurance doesn't cover rentals specifically. I rented with my Amex to use that insurance and had no issues with them accepting that.

I went with SiXT as I needed a 7 seater and the big rental companies were really expensive (like over $100 a day). They weren't as cheap as some of the smallest ones like Fox but had better reviews than the small ones and they had quick pickup (i.e. not having to go to a desk and wait in line). Must say I was actually pretty impressed with them.. shuttle from LAX was fast, their facility was nice and very easy. Didn't include the on board GPS (boo!) but it had Apple Carplay so didn't matter. I probably spent longer in the vehicle pairing Apple Carplay and setting my seats/mirrors and finding somewhere to get lunch than I did picking it up or dropping it off. They had really good details on finding the shuttle at the airport, pictures of where to go and everything, very nice.

My only thing is they tried to say there was some minor new damage, but it looked to me like it was already defined on their system (and they had a very detailed system with notes for every scratch and scuff, pretty nice in itself), but when I tried to pull it up on a picture she said "oh it must be this one on the system then" pointing at one circled area in the system, didn't even bother to look at my pictures. So not sure if that was just uncertainty on the person checking it, or if it's something they try to pull every time. Hopefully not.

tl'dr: TAKE PICTURES of everything when you pick it up before you even get in.

[Eric Vail]

My credit card covers $65000 toward the I am renting. That is it. I would never rely on that on its own. If I was in an accident that was my fault, I would have to pay for the damage of both vehicles. If there were injuries and a lawsuit, there is no liability coverage.

In Canada/US, my personal car insurance transfers over at the same amount for my rental, so that is all I need.

In Europe, personal car insurance does not transfer over. You need to get the maximum insurance. I rented from Budget out of Rome. I accepted every insurance that was offered when booking on Expedia. None was offered at pickup. The guy said you already have insurance. When I returned it, they found a tiny scratch up high on the door and a tiny bend on the licence plate corner and nailed me with an $800 euro fee. It was a scam. That damage was already there. They didn't have me fill out the walk around report prior. I complained to Budget, but they were unresponsive. Fortunately, my credit card did cover it. I will never rent with Budget again.

[Raekwon]

I get the glass insurance, I don't want to have a claim on my policy for the inevitable cracked windshield.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by stampsx2

Do you get car rental insurance in canada or the us? I’m wondering who here recommends getting it? I’m one of those suckers that get bullied into getting it but do you even need it?

Any stories out there of getting it vs not getting it? It’s really expensive. Is the peace of mind worth it? All it takes is one person to ding your rental in a parking lot.

What rental company would you say you’ve had the best experience with? I’ve had thrifty before and find they are super high pressure on getting their expensive insurance. Lot’s of fear mongering about getting sued and court battles etc etc etc. Even to the level of not giving you the keys until you get the insurance.

So I sometimes need to rent cars for work, and a couple years ago in Nebraska I ran into a situation where I elected not to get the insurance, paid for the car on my personal CC (i didn't get my corporate CC until a few months afterward), and picked it up at night. When I saw it in the morning, there was an undocumented issue with the rear bumper that gave me a ton of concern and anxiety. I returned the truck and never heard back from them so it must have been me making a mountain out of a molehill, but that gave me enough of a lesson to always get the insurance. It's an extra, what $50-60 a week that might save you from unexpected charges in the thousands. Especially for work, it's a no-brainer - expense it. If that situation had gone unideally I would have either had to bring it up to my employer to get them to cover the charges or pay out of pocket - just a lose-lose.

But even for purely personal rentals, the cost is worth the peace of mind. I've always done my rentals through Enterprise and never had anyone pressure me, in fact I love their customer service and have never had anyone give me trouble. The Enterprise up in Grand Prairie was especially gracious to me.

I will add, that for personal rentals, I also have used aa family member's employee family/friends discount and those have the rental insurance built in, which is awesome. I'm not sure about other vendors, but in the case of Enterprise, someone can add up to five people as family or friends. The family discount is deeper than the friends discount, but the rental insurance alone is worth going through that channel if it exists.

[Fuzz]

It's not $50 a week, the last rental I had was $30/day for the LDW. The car was $300 for a week, so that would have almost doubled the rental price.

[Ryan Coke]

Always do a walk around and take pictures when you pick up a rental. Takes only a minute but well worth it.

I’ve used a whole bunch of rental car companies, but at this point I use Alamo 90% of the time. Rates are almost always the best, and have never had the slightest issue with them. Any normal dings and dents are just expected wear and tear, and never had any problems after a return. They’re basically the discount arm of the Enterprise/National/Alamo family, and are all good to deal with.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

It's not $50 a week, the last rental I had was $30/day for the LDW. The car was $300 for a week, so that would have almost doubled the rental price.

My bad, should not have pulled numbers outta my ass.
In my head typing that, a week was a travel-shortened work week, not seven full days. My last rental invoice shows I paid $32/day which over three days was $95.97. Still worth the cost to me, though.

Originally Posted by Ryan Coke

Always do a walk around and take pictures when you pick up a rental. Takes only a minute but well worth it.

For sure. However when you're arriving at an airport late night, sometimes things get missed in the walkaround that are visible in sunlight, especially if you're not at maximum cognitive ability after travel