Priller
Well-known member
I'm in the market to swap insurance yet again, and am comparing quotes for my Moto Guzzi (which, in the grand tradition of Ontario insurance being inexplicable, is marginally more expensive to cover than my Tuono).
One thing I see is the base income replacement coverage is a hilariously low $400/wk. Bumping that to the highest (thought still very low) coverage of $1000/wk adds $3-400/yr to the premium, so isn't an insignificant bump. In my case it takes the Guzzi coverage from ~$1500/yr to over $1850/yr.
My question is whether this is a useful addition? On the face of it, it seems like absolutely critical coverage. In a bad scenario, I could be left unable to work for potentially quite a long period of time, and as I make a good bit more than my wife, this would put us into a tough spot. Even $1000/wk would be a stretch.
But on the other hand, for what seems like critical coverage, I never hear anyone talking about it. Is it something that is typically covered elsewhere, such as short-term disability etc via an employer? And then therefore adding the coverage is redundant and unnecessary? My own employee benefits are actually pretty crap, but my wife's are excellent and I'm covered as a spouse.
Curious to hear anyone's thoughts...
One thing I see is the base income replacement coverage is a hilariously low $400/wk. Bumping that to the highest (thought still very low) coverage of $1000/wk adds $3-400/yr to the premium, so isn't an insignificant bump. In my case it takes the Guzzi coverage from ~$1500/yr to over $1850/yr.
My question is whether this is a useful addition? On the face of it, it seems like absolutely critical coverage. In a bad scenario, I could be left unable to work for potentially quite a long period of time, and as I make a good bit more than my wife, this would put us into a tough spot. Even $1000/wk would be a stretch.
But on the other hand, for what seems like critical coverage, I never hear anyone talking about it. Is it something that is typically covered elsewhere, such as short-term disability etc via an employer? And then therefore adding the coverage is redundant and unnecessary? My own employee benefits are actually pretty crap, but my wife's are excellent and I'm covered as a spouse.
Curious to hear anyone's thoughts...