HLS wrote:
>
> "Pete C." <aux3.DOH.4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:47B5E8FD.8924405E@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > Very true.
> >
> > On a related note, the property tax you pay on a vehicle will be based
> > on the book value as well, and if you have a condition that would
lower
> > that value, such as high mileage, you can note that to the tax folks
and
> > save some money there. I did that with my previous vehicle and saved
> > like $50 in taxes with no more effort than stopping by the tax office
> > for a few minutes.
>
> We don't pay property tax for vehicles here in Texas, AFAIK. At least
not
> in this part of the state.
Right, but many other states do. My comment was a reminder for those in
such states, that they can potentially save a bit if their vehicle is
worth less than the base blue book value.
>
> If you have a classic, and parts/labor are likely to be exorbitant, you
will
> have to
> get special insurance if you want "collision/comprehensive".
>
> Cuhulin is not the owner of such a car.
>
> The driver's record is an im****tant part of the equation, for
liability..
>
> In my case, my provider (Beacon) gave me a special deal if I would take
car
> insurance and house insurance from them in a bundle.
>
> AARP's Hartford had better car rates, perhaps, but refused to insure our
> 80 year old house as they feared electrical might not be up to standard
and
> because we have a fireplace/chimney, even though it is not used.
Some companies are really strange in what panics them, and it doesn't
seem to be consistent between companies.
>
> Therefore, we went with Beacon as it was a better overall deal.
>
> I did not even insure my 97' Dodge van for collision and comprehensive.
> It is only worth maybe $3000-3500, and the insurance is beginning to be
> prohibitive..
Right, at some point the payout you'd get for damage to the vehicle
would barely be above the deductible.
|
