by Guest » Fri Oct 26, 2007 01:49 am
while changing oil of wife's 2005 Mustang GT, I had it on ramps...on new gravel in side yard.
About 4" 3/4" rock. When I drove up on ramps, felt unstable.
Got out; left tire was 50& on ramp (who knows why).
I tried to drive off; gravel "caved in" towards center of car.
Tilted down some. Slowly, it setteld even more.
Front apron caught on ramp; ripped apron loose.
Well, the new Mustangs are one piece in front...pulled loose from left fender. Pulled loose from plastic air dam under bottom of front. Pulled off of inner fender.
I got it straightened out. Used small screws to attch to inner fender.
looks ok from a distance. Actually, it is not noticeable to most people, BUT, it will fail someday when I drive at high speed.
So: what is coverage?
Collision or Comprehensive?
About 4" 3/4" rock. When I drove up on ramps, felt unstable.
Got out; left tire was 50& on ramp (who knows why).
I tried to drive off; gravel "caved in" towards center of car.
Tilted down some. Slowly, it setteld even more.
Front apron caught on ramp; ripped apron loose.
Well, the new Mustangs are one piece in front...pulled loose from left fender. Pulled loose from plastic air dam under bottom of front. Pulled off of inner fender.
I got it straightened out. Used small screws to attch to inner fender.
looks ok from a distance. Actually, it is not noticeable to most people, BUT, it will fail someday when I drive at high speed.
So: what is coverage?
Collision or Comprehensive?
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 05:17 am Post Subject:
Collision... your vehicle collided with the ramp. Same as if it was driven/rolled into something.
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 11:46 am Post Subject:
Agree Collision.......
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 10:16 am Post Subject:
Hi there, collision coverage on your auto should address to these damages. The other posters have already given you a clear verdict in this regard. Hope that have cleared the confusion form your mind Well, I've found out something for you. Check the following link and see if it helps.
http://www.ampminsure.org/start/about2654.html
Rupert
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 11:52 am Post Subject:
Guys, you all are quite right.
We often add coverages to our master policy in order to buy full coverage for the vehicle. And that is the normal instinct because we all are driven by the urge of protecting the asset. But the problem arises when some incident occurs and we are confused about 'which coverage will address the damages'.
Collision and comprehensive coverages are often pronounced together but there is a fine line of difference on what they cover.
Collision will cover the repairing cost of your car if it hits or get hit by another car or by any other object and will exclude damages caused by fire, arson, theft, vandalism and other such events. On the other hand, comprehensive coverage covers losses caused by perils other than collision.
Regards,
Juanita
Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 12:23 am Post Subject:
Agreed with all postings, except keep in mind that a collision with an animal, bird or (believe it or not) a FISH is a comprehensive loss for deductible purposes.
Yours would most assuredly be a collision loss, unless you were using your dog as a ramp (lol)
InsTeacher 8)
Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 11:39 am Post Subject:
I don't understand why you said this Ins. Teacher.
is a comprehensive loss for deductible purposes.
I don't see what deductible purposes have to do with it. Given they are separate and different coverages, (a good 90% of the claims I work carry identical ded. on coll/comp). And most commonly comp losses do not generate a rate increase (animal impact peril especially). Did you mean instead deductible purposes, coverage purposes? Just curious about your thought process on that one! :?Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 04:20 pm Post Subject:
I don't see what deductible purposes have to do with it. Given they are separate and different coverages, (a good 90% of the claims I work carry identical ded. on coll/comp). And most commonly comp losses do not generate a rate increase (animal impact peril especially). Did you mean instead deductible purposes, coverage purposes? Just curious about your thought process on that one!
Lori, I see your point, but only to a point! I am just as familiar with policies that have different comp/collision deductibles. My own contract has a $250 comp and a $500 collision deductible on our full coverage cars!
As far as "chargeable" losses, agreed. Comp losses normally do not generate a rate increase compared to collision losses that will. Commonly, what insurers will do for "too many" comp losses is raise the deductible or non-renew the policy, and not increase the premiums. The info in the thread is accurate concerning the difference between comp and collision regarding coverage.
Did this clarify my intent? Hope so!
InsTeacher 8)
Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 06:45 pm Post Subject:
Lori, I see your point, but only to a point! I am just as familiar with policies that have different comp/collision deductibles. My own contract has a $250 comp and a $500 collision deductible on our full coverage cars!
Mine too! :wink: Until about six months ago and I raised the comp to 500 as well (did homeowners too still had 250 on that puppy! yikes! dropped my premium 227.00 a year! what a moron, you think I'd have been paying better attention to my OWN policys! :oops: ) The company I work for (as I said) 90% seem to carry the same generally 500 each. Likely they are explaining the prem. difference better! :)As far as "chargeable" losses, agreed. Comp losses normally do not generate a rate increase compared to collision losses that will. Commonly, what insurers will do for "too many" comp losses is raise the deductible or non-renew the policy, and not increase the premiums. The info in the thread is accurate concerning the difference between comp and collision regarding coverage.
Agreed. I wasn't trying to agrue with you just don't/didn't understand what you meant by 'is comp for deductible 'purposes'. I guess assuming that comp ded was/would be lower than collision.
Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 07:11 pm Post Subject:
Mine too! Until about six months ago and I raised the comp to 500 as well (did homeowners too still had 250 on that puppy! yikes! dropped my premium 227.00 a year! what a moron, you think I'd have been paying better attention to my OWN policys!
Lol...great comment. Just curious...what kind of car do you HAVE? And...where the heck do you live? Got anything on the MVR? I ask only because the semi-annual difference in my premium between a $250 and $500 comp. deductible is only $17.00! Had to go with the $250, of course!
The general rule of thumb is that if the difference in deductibles (in our case, $250) saves you more in premium in a 3-year period than the difference in deductible, go with the higher deductible. My diff. in that period is $102 savings in premium to pay $250 more in deductible in the event that I have a loss; I (of course) went with the lower deductible.
So, readers...compare the premium savings with a higher deductible to what you would have to pay out of pocket if you had a loss! This can make a huge difference in collision premiums as well! However...DO NOT skimp on the liability portions! Get the highest level of liability coverage that you can afford. Remember...anytime you hurt someone or damage their property- you are liable. And if your insurance policy does not fully cover the loss, the insured is responsible for the balance of any awards!
Just a thought...
InsTeacher 8)
Add your comment