Do GY Billboards void your insurance?

[Thor maine]

It is funny , it seems with regard to insurance most of you guy's seem most concerned if they will pay to replace your factory correct 1965 paint job with the correct number of rivets? But with insurance what you should be concerned about is if I am involved in an accident and I am a fault am going to loose my home, all my money, all of my financial security for my family. And it comes back to that " willful disregard" and running non DOT , non street legal tires on the street. And it could , not saying it would , come back and bite you in the ass.

[1ntCobra]

Originally Posted by Thor maine

It is funny , it seems with regard to insurance most of you guy's seem most concerned if they will pay to replace your factory correct 1965 paint job with the correct number of rivets? But with insurance what you should be concerned about is if I am involved in an accident and I am a fault am going to loose my home, all my money, all of my financial security for my family. And it comes back to that " willful disregard" and running non DOT , non street legal tires on the street. And it could , not saying it would , come back and bite you in the ass.

Hmm, so you have come to the conclusion that Evan is only concerned that his insurance is going to cover the replacement of his bill board tires in an accident?

The way I read his last post, he seems to be covering his a** for exactly what you are concerned about, the loss of home, money, etc. Let's look at a few of Evan's words, "... a prudent way to try and protect yourself on this issue regarding Bill Boards voiding coverage ...". So essentially what he has done is get documentation from his insurance company that his Bill Boards are NOT going to void his car insurance.

[REAL 1]

Originally Posted by 1ntCobra

Hmm, so you have come to the conclusion that Evan is only concerned that his insurance is going to cover the replacement of his bill board tires in an accident?

The way I read his last post, he seems to be covering his a** for exactly what you are concerned about, the loss of home, money, etc. Let's look at a few of Evan's words, "... a prudent way to try and protect yourself on this issue regarding Bill Boards voiding coverage ...". So essentially what he has done is get documentation from his insurance company that his Bill Boards are NOT going to void his car insurance.

Finally, someone who gets it.

Some of the rest here are truly clueless especially those that are looking for "facts" and exemplar "letters" to be produced for their "official" review.

[dcdoug]

OK, so I put this question to Hagerty, with whom I have my policy and here was their response:

"Thank you for your e-mail. With regard to the tires, if they are not highway approved and you drive down the highway with them and blow a tire we could deny replacing the tire for you since it is not DOT approved. If you blow your tire and cause damages to the car then we would likely cover that portion of the claim to fix the car.

Of course, each claim is reviewed on a case by case basis. The adjuster assigned to your file at the time of the claim would look over your coverage, your state guidelines, and advise as to what is covered and your options at that time."

It's not an awful canned response, but it also doesn't inspire 100% confidence either.

Doesn't mean that I couldn't get a firmer commitment if I called them, which I may do. After all, as someone previously posted, it is true that there isn't much on my cobra that meets current DOT standards and it is legally registered as a historic vehicle.

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by dcdoug

It's not an awful canned response, but it also doesn't inspire 100% confidence either.

Pretty close, though. If you pull your policy and look under the collision and comp exclusions (likely called "Part D - Coverage for Damage to Your Auto") and then look for, maybe, the second or third exclusion, it will specifically say "Road Damage to Tires"). If I'm right, and that's there on your policy, then their answer was actually worse than canned because it implies that they would have bought you a new tire when it "blew out going down the road" if it was DOT approved, which would clearly not be the case. Unless, of course, you have a special endorsement to the contrary. But you know, Doug, I'm proud of you for even taking the time to think about it. Seriously, take a look for that exclusion, and if it's there, then they gave you a really shi**y answer.

[DAVID GAGNARD]

There is no policy that I know of and I've read literally a hundred policies, that cover your tires for "blowouts" going down the road or otherwise....
It would be like your insurance company is giving you warranty on tires which they do not do........

But, under your collision/comprehensive coverage "resulting damage" IS covered........this is for a blow out!!!!!!!!!

Now, if you run over something in the road and "blowout" the tire or cut it down or otherwise destroy the tire, then IT IS covered under your collision coverage,because the tire collided with something to damage it and all resulting damage to your car is covered under the collision coverage...

I don't think this was the original question though, the question was weather or not your company can/will deny coverage for the use of non DOT tires......
totally different ball game...

David

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by DAVID GAGNARD

I don't think this was the original question though, the question was weather or not your company can/will deny coverage for the use of non DOT tires......
totally different ball game...

Let's kick it up one notch then. Suppose Doug's policy has an exclusion tucked in the itsy-witsy back that says "all coverages under this agreement are absolutely null and void if you happen to be running funky non-DOT tires on your stupid-ass Cobra replica." Does that little email that he got from the carrier, or even a nice type-written letter from the carrier saying "oh yes, you're covered," on its letterhead even, act to extend coverage? Or does that exclusionary language control? Maybe Evan can get this one... but I wouldn't bet on it.

[DAVID GAGNARD]

Originally Posted by patrickt

Let's kick it up one notch then. Suppose Doug's policy has an exclusion tucked in the itsy-witsy back that says "all coverages under this agreement are absolutely null and void if you happen to be running funky non-DOT tires on your stupid-ass Cobra replica." Does that little email that he got from the carrier, or even a nice type-written letter from the carrier saying "oh yes, you're covered," on its letterhead even, act to extend coverage? Or does that exclusionary language control? Maybe Evan can get this one... but I wouldn't bet on it.

That would be for a judge to decide!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

David

[dcdoug]

Originally Posted by patrickt

Pretty close, though. If you pull your policy and look under the collision and comp exclusions (likely called "Part D - Coverage for Damage to Your Auto") and then look for, maybe, the second or third exclusion, it will specifically say "Road Damage to Tires"). If I'm right, and that's there on your policy, then their answer was actually worse than canned because it implies that they would have bought you a new tire when it "blew out going down the road" if it was DOT approved, which would clearly not be the case. Unless, of course, you have a special endorsement to the contrary. But you know, Doug, I'm proud of you for even taking the time to think about it. Seriously, take a look for that exclusion, and if it's there, then they gave you a really shi**y answer.

Here's what it says in Part D: "Road damage to tires unless caused by "other than collision" covered by this policy." So doesn't cover blow-outs, not that I was thinking it would, but does show that their people don't really know what they are talking about.

By the way, nowhere in this policy do I see anything about meeting DOT safety standards or anything like that. Seems pretty clear that you are covered.

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by dcdoug

... but does show that their people don't really know what they are talking about.

Hmmm, you speakum with silver tongue. Which is why I'm trying to lure Evan down my primrose path.

[DAVID GAGNARD]

Not to insult any insurance agents on this forum, but 95% of the agents DO NOT know what is in the policy they are selling you, they are salesmen, their job is to sell you something and that's what they do......when the have a coverage question they go straight to the adjuster and ask them if it is covered or not!!!!!!!!

My biggest pet peeve with agents: they tell people their trailer is covered when hooked to their truck and their truck insurance carries over to the trailer....well, that is a HALF-TRUTH....

Your truck liability carries over to the trailer meaning whatever damage your trailer does to someone else's property will be covered by your truck's liability,whatever damage is done to your trailer itself is NOT COVERED by your truck insurance.......trailers are considered like another auto,they have a VIN and license plate and must be insured separately to have coverage for the trailer itself!!!!!!!!!
When the owner tells me his agent SAID it's covered by the truck insurance I just politely tell him to call his agent and have him handle the claim and pay for the damages!!!!
Usually I get a call from the agent wanting to know why we are not paying for the trailer damage,then I explain it to him and the usual answer is and I quote: "I DIDN'T KNOW THAT"
Well, duh,it's your job to know what you are selling a client!!!!!!!!!!!

BTW: Trailer insurance is dirt cheap.....

David

[750hp]

I like the banter, AND I'm learning things about insurance as well!

[rodneym]

Can we just give patrickt his own 'POINT/COUNTERPOINT' forum?
With special guests?
Maybe even cigarette ads?

[1985 CCX]

Ok, have not read to much of this thread because its another big brother thing to me.

Try asking your insurance this:
I have a small two seat convertible w/o air bags, 600hp, pin drive wheels and it weighs about 2000lbs... Throw in you have teens in the house. LOLOL

Guessing after the laughter you will also be void of insurance...

Come on guys....

[REAL 1]

Patrickt: You obviously don't read any posts except your own.

Go back and re-read my last post or as the case may be read it for the first time and you will have your answer to the main question in your last post.

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by REAL 1

Go back and re-read my last post or as the case may be read it for the first time and you will have your answer to the main question in your last post.

<sigh> ... Evan, I'll just let the thread die a death with dignity.

[jhv48]

Originally Posted by patrickt

<sigh> ... Evan, I'll just let the thread die a death with dignity.

It's way too late for that!

[REAL 1]

:lol:

[Mark IV]

Originally Posted by patrickt

<sigh> ... Evan, I'll just let the thread die a death with dignity.

Found this picture of Patrick on line.....

[Jamo]

Have y'all had 'nugh of this? Damn lawyers and insurance folks make me dizzy.