people getting rid of their Leafs/EVs/PHEVs and going back to ICEVs

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I thought claiming an accident that wasn't your fault, such as the hit and run, wouldn't ding your rates.

This was called "no fault" insurance when it was introduced, but a more accurate term would be "YOUR Fault insurance." They just raise the rates for everyone involved. It's great - for the insurance industry.
 
LeftieBiker said:
I thought claiming an accident that wasn't your fault, such as the hit and run, wouldn't ding your rates.

This was called "no fault" insurance when it was introduced, but a more accurate term would be "YOUR Fault insurance." They just raise the rates for everyone involved. It's great - for the insurance industry.

When someone unknown damages your vehicle, who should pay? Beyond the obvious, who will never get caught.

If you are arguing for not for profit auto insurance then I'm all ears!

Anyway they did not raise my rates.
 
danrjones said:
Isn't there a law in CA that limits when your rates are allowed to go up?

I thought claiming an accident that wasn't your fault, such as the hit and run, wouldn't ding your rates.
I don't know the law but someone else on another forum pointed that out to me. Despite that assurance or whatever, I don't trust it.

To me, an insurance company can find any excuse to raise my rates, possibly stating it was for some "other" reason(s). I receive some papers every year where they decided to raise or lower my rates and I have no say in it.

My insurance is already very high and I can't lower my limits due to my net worth/what I could possibly lose. I also have umbrella insurance now.
 
That explains your support for "no fault" insurance, then. Other peoples' reality may vary. I, for instance, got rear-ended on an off ramp with a yield sign. The other driver was clearly at fault, and left the scene. (I got his plate number.) My rates went up, and I was reimbursed for only the bumper cover instead of the whole bumper and mounts. that were damaged. I had to do all the work myself just to cover the parts.
 
LeftieBiker said:
That explains your support for "no fault" insurance, then. Other peoples' reality may vary. I, for instance, got rear-ended on an off ramp with a yield sign. The other driver was clearly at fault, and left the scene. (I got his plate number.) My rates went up, and I was reimbursed for only the bumper cover instead of the whole bumper and mounts. that were damaged. I had to do all the work myself just to cover the parts.

That seems completely unfair to you. I get that in life someone has to pay. In your case it should have been them. In my case, I've been paying into state farm for years. I have never had an accident so I've more than covered costs for someone damaging my old truck. Statefarm has made a ton of cash off me so the idea I should be penalized for someone else's bad behavior is unpalatable.

Ymmv
 
State Farm, IIRC, has a s 'first accident forgiveness' option, which I assume you have. As you say, you did prepay for the damage over the years. That isn't generally how car insurance works.
 
I've skimmed https://www.chevybolt.org/threads/farewell-bolt-what-killed-it-for-me-and-what-i-will-miss.36304/ about a Bolt driver going to back to ICE, a MX-5 aka Miata. (Miata Is Always The Answer)
LeftieBiker said:
State Farm, IIRC, has a s 'first accident forgiveness' option, which I assume you have.
I believe it's n/a in California. I'd heard something to that effect and https://blogs.findlaw.com/common_law/2016/12/allstate-learns-a-600000-lesson-no-accident-forgiveness-in-california.html and https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2016/11/30/allstate-to-pay-600k-to-settle-accident-forgiveness-lawsuit/ seem to confirm it. https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/insurance/accident-forgiveness-car-insurance-companies-and-prices/ claims "it is rarely available in California."

https://www.libertymutual.com/auto/car-insurance-coverage/accident-forgiveness says it's n/a in CA.
 
cwerdna said:
I've skimmed https://www.chevybolt.org/threads/farewell-bolt-what-killed-it-for-me-and-what-i-will-miss.36304/ about a Bolt driver going to back to ICE, a MX-5 aka Miata. (Miata Is Always The Answer)

I can't really blame him. I am dying for an electric Miata or Mini convertible. Something small and nimble but affordable (I will never afford a Tesla Roadster 2.0, even if I wanted it). I don't even care if it has the specs of a Mini Cooper SE (110 miles range / 50kW CCS) as long as it is as affordable (under $21k in NY after tax credits).
 
Someone at my work who I know from our EV/EV charging community emailed me saying she returned her Bolt at end of lease today.

She already has two ICEVs and said she doesn't anticipate driving for another couple of months. We're still supposed to WFH unless we have issues that make it tough/impossible to WFH. She doesn't know if she'll get another EV but isn't in the market right now.

Prior to Bolt, she previously leased a 24 kWh Leaf. Her commute was long enough that w/former 24 kWh Leaf she had to charge on both ends but not necessarily to full on both ends.
 
cwerdna said:
I receive some papers every year where they decided to raise or lower my rates and I have no say in it.
Would it be possible, and maybe advisable, to change insurers? Or at least threaten to do so by claiming a lower premium for similar coverage with a competitor? Regrettably, loyalty has no reward anymore.
 
SalisburySam said:
cwerdna said:
I receive some papers every year where they decided to raise or lower my rates and I have no say in it.
Would it be possible, and maybe advisable, to change insurers? Or at least threaten to do so by claiming a lower premium for similar coverage with a competitor? Regrettably, loyalty has no reward anymore.
I've dug into changing insurance companies every now and then. I looked into one that is supposed to be amongst the cheapest in my area and it didn't seem like it'd be much less. Another problem is that cheapest company doesn't have umbrella insurance. Auto insurance maxes out at too low a coverage so I need umbrella from somewhere.

As for threaten to leave because someone else is cheaper, I've not heard of that working w/auto insurance. I talk to an agent that I was assigned and it doesn't seem like he has any say in the rates. We can play with adjusting coverage and deductibles. That's about it.
 
cwerdna said:
Two guys at my work sold their Model 3's. One of them is down to a BRoD (GM, IIRC extended-length) SUV as he said he didn't need his 3 as he moved to be much closer to work.
I checked in with one of the guys. He still has the BRoD GM SUV and an ICE RV now (which I guess could be a battering van of death). Still no return to EVs in his household.

We're all working from home now anyway. I wonder if this will change some point after we start working in the office again, presumably when most of us get vaccinated. We do have free L2 charging at work and that guy now lives kinda far from work.
 
Bad infrastructure and not being male among reasons people give up EVs
About 20 percent of Californian EV adopters gave up plug-ins, study finds.
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2021/04/one-in-five-californian-ev-drivers-revert-to-piston-power-but-why/
 
^^^ From the above:
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the sociodemographics of the EV abandoners was the opposite of the traits that correlate highly with buying an EV. (The sample size here is slightly smaller at 1,727 households, 356 of whom left the EV life.) They were more likely to have smaller households and have fewer vehicles in the household; they were younger, earned less, rented more, were less likely to live in a detached house, and were less likely to be male than the Californians who stuck with EVs. . . .

Electric driving range and the convenience of charging were the pain points, but charging was the biggest culprit: the authors found that "[f]or a one-point increase in satisfaction with the convenience of charging a BEV, there are 19.5% lower odds of discontinuing BEV adoption."

Also unsurprisingly, those keeping their EVs had more access to level 2 (240 V AC) charging at home, as well as more access to charging generally. . . .


This sounds familiar ;)
 
cwerdna said:
cwerdna said:
Two guys at my work sold their Model 3's. One of them is down to a BRoD (GM, IIRC extended-length) SUV as he said he didn't need his 3 as he moved to be much closer to work.
I checked in with one of the guys. He still has the BRoD GM SUV and an ICE RV now (which I guess could be a battering van of death). Still no return to EVs in his household.

We're all working from home now anyway. I wonder if this will change some point after we start working in the office again, presumably when most of us get vaccinated. We do have free L2 charging at work and that guy now lives kinda far from work.
I haven't re-checked with the above guys but within my workgroup under my manager, there are ~17 of us including the manager. I know for sure two of us have BEVs, including me. Some new folks have joined post-pandemic that I haven't met in person yet (only over remote meetings). From what I can gather, it's possible that one or two of them might have BEVs. The rest just have ICEVs and not even PHEVs at that.

One of them recently leased an Audi Q5 or Q3 (they had no car when they started working for us), I highly doubt it's a PHEV since they've never ever mentioned plugging in, asked about charging, nor expressed any interest in plug-in vehicles, etc. And, they live in some place in SF where it's possible they can't charge at home anyway.

One of our new employees lives in NY (working from home), another in WA (working from home) but the rest of us are based in CA and we have free L2 charging at work.
 
I read the arstechnica article and was not surprised. If someone does not have convenient charging at home (or maybe at work), then they will give up on EV. With supercharger network, Tesla drivers are less likely to give up on their cars even without convenient charging at home.
 
Didn't read the article but can guess most of what it contained. Lack of reliable public charging, reduced ability to charge at home, lack of acceptable choices during the purchase decision.

Those are the reasons of the handful of people I know that went back to gas. This includes someone who refuses to charge publicly or try to be efficient with his 30 kwh LEAF during his commute. He traded it in because he was getting home "on the last bar" and decided he wasn't putting up with that uncertainty although I suspect he could have made it work at least a few more years but he got the 30 kwh when it was LEAF or Tesla only. Now he is using his experience to blow off EVs despite the fact there are now a half dozen options that would cover his needs well over a decade.

Also another who got one living in apt planning to use combo of dealer charger and one near his house. Dealer option didn't last a year and one near his house although still functioning has been down a dozen times over the past 6 years or so and he didn't have the range to skip many charging sessions so instead of upgrading to one that could, he bailed as well

What it boils down to is some won't change unless the perceive the change to be perfect. Well, gas is becoming less perfect every day and I am thinking some will be regretting it when paying for it this Summer.
 
Lots of people like to mix things up. They try an EV for the novelty, and if it is not clearly better for them than alternatives then they are on to something else the next time.

I'll also guess that the switchers are overwhelmingly people who lease cars. They are less likely to enjoy the money savings that comes with long term EV ownership. Or the reverse: they jumped on the EV bandwagon because a lease was dirt cheap and jumped off when it was not.
 
Back
Top