Attention to car owners: these 3 types of car insurance are basically useless. Buying them is a waste of money. Novices should not be fooled
Now there are more and more traffic rules, which obviously have advantages and disadvantages. For car owners, they must pay more attention when driving, especially at some complex intersections, where points and fines are easy to be deducted. For example, at an intersection, when passing a traffic light, although you know that you can turn right on a red light, many car owners are deducted points and fined when they turn right. This is mainly because you don’t understand the relevant rules. You can only turn right when the full-screen signal light is red, and you must pay attention to avoiding pedestrians on the zebra crossing.
And if it is a full-screen signal light, but there is a sign at the intersection that clearly states that you cannot turn right when the red light is on, it is obviously illegal to turn right at this time. Of course, even if you are an old driver, you will inevitably have problems when you drive out. Sometimes you really have no choice but to drive normally, but there is no guarantee that other car owners will do the same, so car insurance is very important. There are many types of auto insurance, and the first year is relatively complete, and the price is more expensive, generally more than 5,000, and the price of auto insurance will become lower and lower in the next few years. But it should be noted that car owners should pay attention to these three types of car insurance, which are basically useless. Buying them is a waste of money. Novices should not be fooled.
The first useless car insurance is theft and rescue. Many people hear this name and mistakenly think that theft is more useful for emergency rescue. For example, if something is stolen in the car, there is no need to be afraid, and the insurance company will pay for it. In fact, this is a completely wrong understanding, because the full name of theft and rescue is “whole car theft and rescue”. In other words, the loss of a certain part of the car or a valuable item such as a mobile phone is not within the scope of theft and rescue claims. Only when the entire car is stolen will the compensation be paid. But now there are surveillance everywhere, even if there is a thief, it is impossible to steal the whole car. Therefore, it is very rare and almost impossible for a whole vehicle to be stolen. In this way, theft and emergency rescue are very tasteless, and it is basically useless to buy it, and it is a complete waste of money.
The second car insurance that is also relatively tasteless is glass insurance. Relatively speaking, glass insurance is slightly more useful than theft and emergency rescue, but it is also not used in actual use. Although there are many glass in the car, including front and rear windshields, triangular windows, left and right lift glass, and even sunroof glass, Mirrors and glass in headlights. However, the scope of claims for glass insurance is very narrow, and it is not as simple as we imagined.
Its full name is “Individual Glass Broken Insurance”, and the key point is the word “individually”. Only when a piece of glass in the car is broken independently and other parts are safe and sound can you get compensation. However, if the glass is broken, it is generally caused by a collision As a result, it is impossible that there will be no problems elsewhere. Even if the glass is broken, falls off and scratches the car paint, you can’t get compensation, so it’s basically useless.
The third type of insurance that is not very useful is scratch insurance. Like glass insurance, scratch insurance also sounds useful, but it is not very useful in practice. Although you can get compensation for scratches on the car body, there are not many actual situations that fall within the scope of claims for scratch insurance, and others must do it maliciously. For example, a child deliberately scratches the paint of the car with a sharp object, and the perpetrator must be found. It should be noted that if there is a collision between two vehicles in normal driving, resulting in scratches on the car paint, it is generally not within the scope of claims for scratch insurance. What do you think about this?