Car Stereo Equipment Not Covered, Catch22

by kevreh » Thu Dec 16, 2010 12:44 pm
Posts: 2
Joined: 16 Dec 2010

Hi;


I had a water leak in my house recently. Had some car stereo equipment ruined that was stored in boxes. I tend to try various speakers/head units over time and end up collecting various components. Anyways, I have auto and home coverage with the same company. Guess what, equipments not covered(!).

Reason why is each policy basically says that car audio equipment is only covered if its installed. I'm guessing that's due to people saying their stereo was stolen because it was sitting on their front seat. Either way, it seems a like a technicality and is basically saying that I can only own 1 head unit, 1 set of speakers, etc... The agent has been sympathetic (gee thanks) and explained that this is a case they've never seen this before and been talking to different underwriters trying to understand it and blah blah blah.

Any advice on challenging this? Thanks...

Total Comments: 7

Posted: Thu Dec 16, 2010 09:41 pm Post Subject:

If the property was in the house, just like books, furniture, jewelry, it should be covered under the Homeowner's policy. Other language in your homeowner's policy may limit the insurance company's loss exposure, but they probably have to cover the loss, unless the cause itself is not covered..

Posted: Thu Dec 16, 2010 10:38 pm Post Subject:

Hey Max, I've seen quite a few HO policies that contain exclusionary language along the lines of "electronic equipment intended for use or only able to be used in a vehicle or watercraft" in my career.

Methinks the OP has been caught in one el-sucko twist of fate. The auto coverage won't cover the loss as the equipment wasn't installed and the HO policy won't cover it, if my guess above is correct, due to another exclusion.

I've also seen endorsements with a few carriers that will protect automobile equipment while not installed in a vehicle that can be added to a HO contract.

InsTeacher 8)

Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 02:49 pm Post Subject:

a few HO policies that contain exclusionary language along the lines of "electronic equipment intended for use or only able to be used in a vehicle or watercraft"



Well, I'll be darned! Never seen one of those things before. When it comes to insurance contracts, as we know, almost anything is possible.

==================

On a separate note, if you've ever wondered why they don't have seatbelts on school buses, I think this high school senior may be wondering the same thing:

http://www.kfiam640.com/cc-common/news/videos/player.html?loc=4&pimg=&count=1

Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 04:19 pm Post Subject:

I think InsTeacher nailed it. Of course I'm still waiting for my insurance company to mail me the language that illustrates why my audio equipments not covered.

My contact at the ins. office is basically saying this is a unique case they've never come across in 30 years at this office and they've been discussing it amongst themselves. It seems like I fell into a grey area due to the language of auto vs. home. What makes me mad is that they should bone up and pay for it because their own language is self-exclusionary. I've always asked them if I'm covered on everything and if I should be paying extra for certain items. I bet if I had each (home, auto) with a different company then they would be pointing the figure at each other.

Posted: Tue Dec 28, 2010 06:46 pm Post Subject:

I've always asked them if I'm covered on everything and if I should be paying extra for certain items.



Asked who? Your agent? If that's true, then the answers you were given are worthless. Only the contract or an executive officer "speaks" for the insurance company.

What makes me mad is that they should bone up and pay for it because their own language is self-exclusionary.



If that's true, then the legal principle of adhesion will apply and you WILL HAVE TO BE PAID. When an ambiguity exists in a contract, the party that did not create the words to the contract will have the words decided in their favor -- but it usually requires getting a judge/jury to agree that an ambiguity exists.

That often involves lawyers who, with no abiguity whatsoever, pluck 30%-40% from your settlement. That can be a waste of money when small claims are at issue. It would be simpler to understand the principle of adhesion and take the case to Small Claims Court and have the matter decided there -- by a judge who's supposed to understand the law of contracts.

Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2020 12:23 pm Post Subject:

If they were not installed in your vehicle and was at home then I think you should try to contact the home insurer. Because it comes under home insurance and car insurance agent wouldn't help you.

In case of install stereo or any other audio system, they should help the client. Once my car's newly installed amplifiers were having a repair issue and I asked to my coverage to pay these repair charges then they denied to do it and included it in my carelessness. Though I bought that amplifier after reading detailed reviews from here https://99carstereo.com/ but as they found some errors in wiring that's why they didn't cover it. All in all, even home insurance people can include it as your mistake after proper investigation. However, it depends on your coverage plan as well.

Add your comment

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.