| Message |
Author |
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:56 am Post subject: Coll - Does DED apply |
|
|
Driving down the road, object flew out of a vehicle hit the road and then hit my car. Collision is what I am assuming this will be covered under. If I have broad form do you think I will still be responsible for the DED as this was totally unavoidable. Thanks!
Do you think this could increase my rates?
If claim was classified as COMP do you think this would still effect the rates |
|
lak
New member
Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 1
1.50 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 1:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Different carriers see this differently. If it hits the ground then you hit it, collision...If it goes straight from the other vehicle or is airborn when it hits you..comp...comp losses typically are 'non-chargeable' losses, meaning no rate increase. This 'type' of collision loss should also be non-chargeable depending upon how long it was on the ground when you hit it...
Some carriers may still let this go as comp if it was nearly instantaious, ie-fell,hit ground, hit you, or you hit it.
Your deductible(s) under collision or comp are going to apply regardless, and are unavoidable regardless of the facts of loss. You pick your deductibles when you purchase the policy, doesn't matter if no fault of yours n or not...The deductibles are per loss. per coverage...period...
_________________
"Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way." Martin Luther King Jr. |
|
Lori
Moderator
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 8173
Location: Missouri
287.90 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 1:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I agree with Lori as this a carrier to carrier debate. I have handled liability claims for objects falling off vehicles either hitting the ground or airborn. It just depends on the carrier or situation. The last claim I handled of this nature, was a piece of metal falling off a truck. The metal hit the ground. Two vehicles were damaged and the carrier of the truck claimed liability. So there is the possibility it could become a liability. |
|
Trench
Senior member
Joined: 16 Sep 2009
Posts: 911
Location: Kansas City
152.85 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 11:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's most certainly under the liablity coverage, of the 'dropping vehicle'. If you can find the owner of the vehicle that something fell out of ...
_________________
"Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way." Martin Luther King Jr. |
|
Lori
Moderator
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 8173
Location: Missouri
287.90 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 11:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| But I have also handled claims were the exact situation occured were the outcome was the opposite. Had one were a 2 x 4 came off of the vehicle and the vehicle behind it ran over it. The piece of wood bounced off the highway and into the radiator of the car. The carrier denied coverage. |
|
Trench
Senior member
Joined: 16 Sep 2009
Posts: 911
Location: Kansas City
152.85 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Denied (liability) coverage to the shot radiator by the vehicle hauling wood? how? and why?
_________________
"Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way." Martin Luther King Jr. |
|
Lori
Moderator
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 8173
Location: Missouri
287.90 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| They're reasoning was that the driver was either following too close or should have had enough time to react. Bogus in my opinion. Another note, those trucks that have the signs "stay back 300 feet, not responsible for damage", I have yet to see any of those companies not pay for damage. It's like a grocery store parking lot sign. It's just used as a deterent not to file a claim. |
|
Trench
Senior member
Joined: 16 Sep 2009
Posts: 911
Location: Kansas City
152.85 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Trench, that's just criminal, IMO, did the poor guy just say 'ok'? Or is his fighting this denial? What jerks...  See these are the co/adjuster/reps that make us all look bad. 
_________________
"Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way." Martin Luther King Jr. |
|
Lori
Moderator
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 8173
Location: Missouri
287.90 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I got in on the tail end of it with his lawyer. He tried to fight it, and when he threatened to take them to court, they pretty much begged him to do so. He ended up giving up. I agree, these companies have no heart. |
|
Trench
Senior member
Joined: 16 Sep 2009
Posts: 911
Location: Kansas City
152.85 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 10:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | They're reasoning was that the driver was either following too close or should have had enough time to react. |
Wow...! What a load of (insert item here). Since when isn't a person required to secure their cargo in a moving vehicle??
And when they fail to do so, since when are they not responsible for any and all damage caused by any unsecured cargo??
Its like claiming the person behind me is at fault for not being able to avoid 2x4's that I'm throwing out of the back of a pick-up as my buddy drives it down the road. One wouldn't think that just because this guy didn't throw the 2 x 4 out of the truck, he would be any less liable for damage it caused.
Too bad the victim didn't call the insurer's Bluff. I can't imagine a Judge ruling in favor of the truck driver.
_________________
Register Now to have your Insurance queries solved. |
|
Guest
|
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 12:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Too bad the victim didn't call the insurer's Bluff. I can't imagine a Judge ruling in favor of the truck driver.
_________________ |
Well as they say, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't 'em drink. |
|
Trench
Senior member
Joined: 16 Sep 2009
Posts: 911
Location: Kansas City
152.85 Dollars($)
|
|
