Insurance Company Keeping Quiet

by kmherron » Sat Feb 07, 2009 05:54 pm

Hi Lori, my husband was in a car accident in which he was delivering food for work. His car was parked and he was hit by a man going 45 mph. Luckily my husband was not in the car, however, our insurance company has declared it totaled. Now, the liability adjuster seems to be implying that they won't pay the claim because my husband was working at the time of the accident, but I can't get a yes or no out of anyone at the ins. company and I don't know what they're doing! Are they working with the other guy's insurance co. to get them to pay? We've been waiting a week already and no one will tell us anything. Do you have any suggestions, or can you explain the process so I can get an idea of what's going on on their end? Thanks!

Total Comments: 2

Posted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 09:12 pm Post Subject:

When someone else is at fault in an accident and you have collision insurance, you have two options on how to handle the matter. You can file the claim with that other, at-fault, person's carrier but you would need to handle this on your own. The other option is that you can file with your own carrier, initially be subject to your deductible and then your carrier will seek recovery, including your deducible from the at-fault person's carrier. Sometimes when you file your claim with your own carrier, the carrier of the at-fault party will be willing for send payment for your deductible right away. They don't have to, and you would need to ask them directly about this.

Standard personal lines policy exclude coverage for livery but this is the transportation of people, not goods. However, some carriers (I know Progressive does) will also exclude coverage for transportation of food. But here is the grey area... at the time of the accident, was the car being used to deliver goods? I say no, as it was parked at the time. Any ambiguity of the policy (grey areas) should be ruled in favor of providing coverage.

I'd recommend pointing out to your adjuster that, at the time of the accident, the vehicle was _not_ being used to transport food and this is what the policy states. The vehicle was parked at the time and _not_ being used. I can understand them running this by a manager but I also don't think it's that difficult to figure out. Trust me, if you pressed the issue you would win. Also, your carrier should understand that they are going to collect the money back from the other carrier anyway... so why not pay the "questionable" claim, collect the money back, and call it even. I'd see this as the smart thing to do in order to keep a good customer.

Now keep in mind that your carrier won't extend liability coverage for your husband when he is working so your husband wants to make sure that his employer's policy will provide him coverage. They need to have a commercial auto policy with a liability symbol 1. Also, if your husband causes damage to your own vehicle while he is delivering, you now known your policy won't address the damage to your own vehicle. I think the easiest way to address this is to obtain a policy from a carrier that does not add the exclusion of carrier goods on their policy. Again, all will exclude livery but many won't exclude carrying of goods.

Posted: Sun Feb 08, 2009 03:23 am Post Subject: Thank you very much!

Thanks tcope for the reply! That makes me feel better. Our feeling was that if you hit a parked car, whatever the circumstances, you're generally at fault, we just can't get ANYTHING information wise out of the ins. co. and i know that's to protect themselves.

Anyway, I appreciate it. Hopefully this will be resolved sooner rather than later.

Add your comment

Enter the characters shown in the image.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.