GEICO, the second-largest vehicle insurance underwriter in the US, has decided it will no longer cover Tesla Cybertrucks. The company is terminating current Cybertruck policies and says the truck “doesn’t meet our underwriting guidelines.”

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
133 points

No word from the insurance company itself? This whole article seems to be based on a single tweet by a cybertruck owner. For all we know his might be modded in a way that they dropped the insurance on it.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

Yes the circle jerk on this has gone way too far.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

This whole article seems to be based on a single tweet

Ah yes, news these days…

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

This isn’t new. They’ve dropped cybertrucks before, and they’re not the only company to drop/straight up refuse to take them.

https://www.reddit.com/r/CyberStuck/comments/1ejtwkt/insurance_wont_cover_my_cybertruck_so_i_cant/

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

Everyone in here like yay truck bad, I don’t give a fuck about Teslas what’s fucked is goddamn insurance companies can just arbitraryly drop your coverage for no fault of your own. It should be illegal. Like sorry but you agreed to cover this, with all its flaws and took my money for years.

I really wish car/home/health insurance were just federalized. These companies are the oldest con perpetrated on the general public tbh.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Yep, this is 'merica and a bunch of people are already driving this destruction derby without insurance. Do we really want to add a bunch of Cybertrucks to that terrifying demographic?

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

It’s in the article, they didn’t drop him during the coverage period they declined to renew.

It’s perfectly fair, if you can decline to review and insure with someone else when the 6 month term is up, so can they.

permalink
report
parent
reply
86 points
*

More specifically, the only source the article even gives is a link to a reddit post with a screenshot of the tweet, of which doesn’t have a direct link to the tweet. This is half assed journalism at best, considering they even quoted the original screenshot wrong.

Edit: lol they couldn’t even get the person’s name straight. It changed from Robert Stevenson to Anderson after the email portion. Why’s this article even here?

permalink
report
parent
reply
34 points

Why’s this article even here?

Anything Elon bad = upvotes

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

If you manage to find an article with both Elon bad themes and AI bad themes in the same story Lemmings would upvote it up into the atmosphere. You’d be on top of All for like a day!

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

To top it all off the email/text had information redacted not by blurring it with paint, but by using characters in the same font with the same line breaks.

I mean seriously, who does that? Only time I’ve ever busted out inspector to modify a website or tweet or email is to elaborately troll someone with a sceenshot.

Did they really use inspector to redact info out an legit document about an allegedly widespread thing that no one else can produce, or did they draft the whole thing, used strings of ‘x’ to mark where to blur, and forget to blur? /shrug

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 16K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 551K

    Comments