Justin wrote:
>Well, it wouldn't exactly be PC for a major newspaper to be in
favor of
>"civilians" taking their cars on the track, then hitting up
insurance
>companies for money, would it? :)
Nor is it correct for a car owner to do that, IMO. This thread
has come up before, and it has been established that State Farm's
coverage includes "gymkhanas," so it appears that a Solo II
incident would be covered by them. This is a far cry from a
driving school held at a racing facility, however.
>But this casts a bad image on the rest of
>us who want to do these events legitimately, and ultimately it
may be us who
>get screwed in the end for this guy's mistake. That's why this
case
>deserves our consideration - not because he committed fraud, but
because he
>could easily ruin the fun for the rest of us.
If you're counting on your insurance company to cover damage your
car might suffer at racing speeds on a race track, I'd say you're
already in line to have your fun ruined. This sort of
expectation - that damage suffered in high-speed events should be
covered by normal collision coverage - only serves to make
insurance adjusters more suspicious and all of our premiums
higher.
It never ceases to amaze me that people will take their street
driver to an event like this, wad it up into a ball, and expect
people to pity them when the insurer won't pony up.
Jay "you break it, you buy it, and I'll do likewise" Mitchell
|