Re: [MV] Insurance underwriters?

islander (islander@midmaine.com)
Sat, 27 Feb 1999 11:16:23 -0500

>In California, where I practice, an insurer can rescind the insurance
>contract
>if you knowingly provide inaccurate information relating to the risk to be
>insured.

Great to finally hear from someone one with true expertise in this area
(instead of us poor guys that have to figure this stuff as we go along
<G>). Thanks Patrick!

Well, everything you said reinforces my thoughts that hiding the "tracks"
feature of my Weasel is a 100% way of getting dropped when it really
matters. As I said, as soon as I told JC Tayler that it had tracks they
said no. If I had danced around the issue, and they had given me the
insurance, then I got in an accident, no way would they have covered me
because they could easily show that they don't insure tracked vehicles
(if indeed that is the case...). Even easier would be showing that I hid
info from them. What jury/judge in the world would buy any answer I
might give to the question of "sir, didn't you think the fact your
vehicle had tracks, and not wheels, was significant enough to note on the
application?". Hell, there is probably something on the application that
asks for a wheel and/or axle count. Pretty hard to avoid raising red
flags when you have to say something like "32 or 16 wheels, depending on
how you count, and 16 axles" :-)

The short of it is, the insurance companies and state don't really care
what the Weasel is or isn't. They know it isn't anything standard (ain't
that the truth!) and therefore aren't interested. So it is up to me to
find some slot to stick it in. The closer match I can find, the better
my chances are of getting/keeping coverage. Out of all the possible
standard civilian definitions out there, something like a "snowcat" or
"construction/farm equipment" is as close as I can get. The lack of
wheels, and in some cases its engine, pretty much excludes the Weasel
from most other categories. Unfortunately I couldn't find a way of
insuring it as a snowcat, and going the route of construction/farm
equipment would restrict my usage to that definition (i.e. construction
or farming). Thus, if I am 50miles away from my house, driving in the
snow with 3 friends, it is a sure bet I am not doing any constructing or
farming :-)

I have coverage now, but only so long as I am on my property. This is
enough to satisfy the bank, so my imediate need for insurance (i.e. to
get a 5yr loan instead of a 3yr one) has been satisfied. But I am still
interested in seeing if there is a way to insure me while on trails off
my property. Looks like I am SOL on this count.

Thanks for everybody's input on this topic. Makes for damned interesting
reading, doesn't it?

Steve

P.S. The Weasel can not be registered as a boat unless it is amphibious.
Only the M-29c variant is, so my M-29 is not. Plus, I don't think
anyone would back me up if my "boat" was seen driving on an
ATV/Snowmobile trail at 36mph <g> Oh, and then I would also have to have
those boat number stickers all over the place too...

===
To unsubscribe from the mil-veh mailing list, send the single word
UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of a message to <mil-veh-request@skylee.com>.