Pre-existing windshield issue?

Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 05:02 am Post Subject:

If you are in a state that your existing company has to cover the windshield, then I suggest you get it replaced before you change policies. At least that seems like the best choice to me. New windshield - and this is no longer an issue. Most glass companies will even come to your place of business and replace it while you are working.

Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 01:17 pm Post Subject:

I'm switching car insurance companies soon, the new company will be inspecting my vehicle and taking photos before the policy goes into effect.

will my new insurance company refuse all future claims regarding the windshield because it had this tiny chip before they started covering me? Even if a rock cracks the passenger side or something?

Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 01:51 pm Post Subject:

I can not believe ther are even comapnies that inspect a vehicle. I have seen homeowners insurance come out and inspect a home but insurance comapnies inspecting a vehicle ...wow. Hope they go this far when protecting their insured.
Egnar, It is best to replace it now. Sometimes all it takews is a higher outdoor temperture or even something else as little to send this little chip into a long scary crack. I once had an escort that had a chip for a long time. One day it was hot out and I had all the wndows rolled up and by the time I went to the car this chip had sent a crack the whole way down the windsheild. It can happen at anytime. Best to just protect yourself now.

Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 02:10 pm Post Subject:

Hi egnar 1,

will my new insurance company refuse all future claims regarding the windshield because it had this tiny chip before they started covering me? Even if a rock cracks the passenger side or something?

Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 02:46 pm Post Subject:

Maybe its NY law but Geico and Allstate needed to inspect my car and I know State Farm does it too. And I also recall Geico needing it too in FL if my car wasn't new.

My mother didn't need her car inspected with Geico in PA tho.

Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 02:19 am Post Subject:

Wow maybe it is state law where you are from. I never heard of this in all my ears of car insurance but my state is different. Maybe one of the experts will read this post and inform us.

Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 04:33 am Post Subject:

I think all the carriers should inspect what they are covering before writing the policy. It’d help the parties, the insured and the insurer, to avoid complications in the future. Now, if its governed by the state law, then all the states should have it implemented right-away.

Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 04:37 am Post Subject:

It is a hassle tho but it takes less than 20 min and overall it should bring everyone's premiums down in reduction of fraud.

Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 04:45 am Post Subject:

I have seen it done both ways. There is plenty of statistical evidence that doing inspections on vehicles before binding the coverage will reduce losses. There is also plenty of evidence that it is a huge burden on the applicants and the agents. It would make it just about impossible to bind business through the Internet. Even with in-person appointments, most people drive one car to the agency for their appointment; they do not drive all three or four cars that they own. This is one of those cases where the product people have to choose between the lesser of two evils.

Most companies land on the side of NOT requiring inspections, unless they are having profitability challenges. Sometimes the product managers will require inspections from certain agents that have poor loss ratios. (I once had to visit an agency in downtown Toledo that had loss ratio problems on physical damage. We insisted that they inspect all vehicles for physical damage. I called on them later to follow up, and I asked about the inspections. This agency was on the INTERIOR of a downtown building. They had no windows. Their door opened up into the interior of the building, like a mall. I asked to see how they went about the inspections, given their location. Finally the agent admitted, "Well ... okay, I just go out into the hallway, and look down the hallway and out the door to try to see the car as they drive by, when they leave their appointment." So that was how she was doing inspections. Okay. We cut off her authority to write full coverage.)

That being said, there are some places that state law requires it as an anti-fraud measure. It has been a while since I have done Florida, but I think they require it in certain counties--especially in South Florida. I think New York requires them. If I remember right, California used to require them, but I think they might have dropped that requirement several years ago.

Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 05:44 pm Post Subject:

Back in the good ole days prior to the 'net'...darn near all if not all captive agent companys required this along with photos of the vehicle...cut down on fraud? you better believe it did...it's just not possible most of the time to require this anymore apparently...in our world of 'fast fast fast'...too bad, because as an adjuster there are many many many many times, I know darn good and well that a newly incepted policy that had a claim was prior damage, but no way to prove it...IMO it should be required...but honestly doubt it will ever happen....