Wednesday, April 9, 2008

To Buy or Not to Buy: Renter's Insurance

I recently got to the point in my life where I felt it was important to insure my belongings. I've been a renter for 14 years and, in general, have been too cash-strapped to invest in renter's insurance. Instead, I invested in extra smoke detectors, a fire extinguisher, and used some common sense. (No burning candles left unattended; know where the shut-off valve for the water and gas lines are, lock the doors and windows at night or when I'm away, etc.)

Also, I've been thrifty about my furniture, dishes, and other belongings. 90% of my books are used and could be replaced easily and affordably. Same with my furniture. For instance, I'm currently living in a two-story, three-bedroom apartment with living room, dining room, kitchen, walk-up attic, and full (unfinished) basement. I've fully furnished the property--including stocking the cupboards with pots and pans, and an overabundance of linens--and hardly spent a dime. Most of what I own, I was able to come across free, cheap, or to receive as a gift.

However, now that I have a more stable income and I can actually afford to shell out a bit of cash to protect my possessions, it really does make sense. I know several people who have lost everything to fire. Four were apartment-dwellers; one a homeowner. It happens. I live in a duplex, which means no matter how safe I am in my apartment, if my neighbors (my horrid landlords) were to have an accident or cause a fire, I would likely also suffer damage and loss at my place--an event totally beyond my control.

While I've been thrifty in acquiring my possessions, it would be expensive, disheartening, exhausting, and incredibly time-consuming to replace them. It's taken years to accumulate my thrifty collection of stuff; it would take just as long to replace it using the same method.

Plus, I have a few nice things now. I invested in a delicious set of expensive sheets that make me moan a little bit with joy every time I slip between them. I got them on sale, but they'd cost almost $90 to replace. I have three televisions--all of which I got for free, but they're very nice and replacing them would be costly. Three computers, a printer, three digital cameras, MP3 players, my bed--you get the drift.

So, I went ahead and got a quote from a local insurance agency. I made sure to get replacement coverage, which means that if my house burns down, I can buy a new bed, television, printer, etc. and my insurance will reimburse me. If you don't have this coverage--which costs a little extra--then you'll only be reimbursed for the actual cost of your belongings. How much is a five-year old full-sized bed worth versus the cost of replacing it? Or a one-year old computer? If you don't get replacement value coverage, you may as well not buy insurance at all, in my opinion.

But, here's the catch. After choosing my policy and sending in my first payment, a few weeks went by and I still hadn't received a copy of the policy. I called my agent and she discovered that I had, in fact, been turned down by the insurance company. Why? All they would tell her was that it was my credit--and they sent her back my check.

This infuriated me. My credit score is very good. I'm gainfully and stably employed in the same field I've been in for 14 years. I don't have a criminal record. But you know what I do have? A bankruptcy on my record. It's been more than three years. My credit score is on the brink of being in the second highest range possible. My income is twice the median for my region. I have a savings account, an IRA, and a 401(k). I don't smoke or own a dog (things that make it harder to get insured), apart from a four-month period where I stopped paying just before my bankruptcy, I have never missed a payment on anything since my first credit card was opened 16 years ago. And I only took out the minimum--$15,000--on my policy. I'm 35-years old with no history of fraud or any reason for them to believe that I don't deserve their coverage.

But, they rejected me. The good news, I suppose, is that another company was willing to insure me. They don't look at a person's credit history, I'm told. Their rates are 20% higher, though.

Mostly, I'm angry that I'm losing money because of something so unfair. They didn't even talk to me. They just rejected me because of--I assume--my bankruptcy.

It's so odd that I was able to get a car loan with a competitive rate, but not renter's insurance.

At any rate, I'm switching my car insurance over to the same agency that got me the renter's insurance, so I'll save a little bit of money there and make up some of the difference between the first policy's rate and the second.

And, as a bonus, the company that rejected me has been covering me for free until I sign on with another company, so, technically, I'm getting about a month and a half of free renter's insurance from them.

In the end, I'm a little bitter, but at least I am insured. And if I took the time to shop around more, I might even find a more competitive rate. For now, there are just too many other things to take care of, so I'm going to fork over the dough ($175/year) for the company that's willing to take me on (Vermont Mutual).

The company that rejected me, by the way, was Merrimack mutual.

I wonder if this was a soft pull on my credit or not? If they dinged my credit by checking it for this, I'm going to be extra-special pissed off!

Labels: , , , , , , ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home