State Farm to drop HPDE coverage
Verbatim per State Farm Insurance:
"There is no coverage while a vehicle is being prepared for, used in practice for, or operated in any racing, speed, hill-climbing, jumping, or other similar contest; or on a track designed primarily for racing or high-speed driving. This type of racing/high-speed driving is no longer covered – no liability coverage, no medical payment and no physical damage coverage."
Effective the first renewal of your auto policy
"There is no coverage while a vehicle is being prepared for, used in practice for, or operated in any racing, speed, hill-climbing, jumping, or other similar contest; or on a track designed primarily for racing or high-speed driving. This type of racing/high-speed driving is no longer covered – no liability coverage, no medical payment and no physical damage coverage."
Effective the first renewal of your auto policy
Originally Posted by freq,Nov 16 2006, 10:00 AM
Mmmm, you could interpret that many different ways IMHO.
(Yes, I am a State Farm customer.)
(Yes, I am a State Farm customer.)
This comes from someone else, by the way. My policy is not up for renewal until April.
Originally Posted by Greyman09,Nov 16 2006, 10:02 AM
It was only a matter of time as HPDE becomes more popular. I would imagine any kind autocross will be added soon as well.
Originally Posted by mikegarrison,Nov 16 2006, 10:17 AM
I think this means they still cover my car being driven to/from the track, but it's pretty unambiguous that they won't coverit actually out on the track any more.
This comes from someone else, by the way. My policy is not up for renewal until April.
This comes from someone else, by the way. My policy is not up for renewal until April.
If they wanted to outlaw HPDE they would have worded it very clearly, the fact that they did not leaves it open to debate. They didn't say operating on a track is not covered regardless of the activity. That would be unambigous, unfortunately they linked the phrase....
"or on a track designed primarily for racing or high-speed driving" which could refer to merely operating OR could only refer to competition or practice events on a race track. The problem was they didn't really clearly specify where the clause applies. Because of that you can still be covered.
That said it sounds more like your insurance rep's decision rather than actual policy wording. If the term isn't in the policy it doesn't matter what your agent says, they can deny it but if it's not in the actual policy your lawyer can force coverage.
Trending Topics
Originally Posted by CrazyPhuD,Nov 16 2006, 11:01 AM
Actually it is pretty ambigous. You may think that is SAYS that it's not covered while merely driving on the track but in reality it doesn't. The wording quite simply isn't clear. The only thing clear about the wording is racing and competition events are not covered.
If they wanted to outlaw HPDE they would have worded it very clearly, the fact that they did not leaves it open to debate. They didn't say operating on a track is not covered regardless of the activity. That would be unambigous, unfortunately they linked the phrase....
"or on a track designed primarily for racing or high-speed driving" which could refer to merely operating OR could only refer to competition or practice events on a race track. The problem was they didn't really clearly specify where the clause applies. Because of that you can still be covered.
That said it sounds more like your insurance rep's decision rather than actual policy wording. If the term isn't in the policy it doesn't matter what your agent says, they can deny it but if it's not in the actual policy your lawyer can force coverage.
If they wanted to outlaw HPDE they would have worded it very clearly, the fact that they did not leaves it open to debate. They didn't say operating on a track is not covered regardless of the activity. That would be unambigous, unfortunately they linked the phrase....
"or on a track designed primarily for racing or high-speed driving" which could refer to merely operating OR could only refer to competition or practice events on a race track. The problem was they didn't really clearly specify where the clause applies. Because of that you can still be covered.
That said it sounds more like your insurance rep's decision rather than actual policy wording. If the term isn't in the policy it doesn't matter what your agent says, they can deny it but if it's not in the actual policy your lawyer can force coverage.
There is nothing ambiguous about that wording, IMO. The "on a racetrack" part is clearly independent from the "racing" part because of the use of the semi-colon.
Speaking of careful wording, there is no mention of "comprehensive" as being part of the denied coverage, so I assume if your car is stolen or a tree falls on it or even a deer jumps out in front of it while at an HPDE then it is still covered.
Originally Posted by mikegarrison,Nov 16 2006, 11:24 AM
However, I suppose that if your agent goes to bat for you then they might be able to sway the claims department into helping you out a little.
Speaking of careful wording, there is no mention of "comprehensive" as being part of the denied coverage, so I assume if your car is stolen or a tree falls on it or even a deer jumps out in front of it while at an HPDE then it is still covered.
Speaking of careful wording, there is no mention of "comprehensive" as being part of the denied coverage, so I assume if your car is stolen or a tree falls on it or even a deer jumps out in front of it while at an HPDE then it is still covered.
And a deer jumping in from of a moving car isn't compressive. It's always been explained to me that if your car is moving (or the other car is moving - ie: it rolled into you) then its collision. Compressive would be when the dear runs into it while its parked.






