Q. We have an adjuster denying collision coverage for an accident involving a deer.The policy is a BAP with specified causes of loss and collision coverage (no comprehensive). Is the adjuster correct in his denial?
A. This is a covered collision loss but there seems to be confusion among adjusters when the policy has specified causes of loss and not comprehensive. It is important to note the sentence “If you carry comprehensive” with the key word being “if” in the physical damage provision on the CA 00 01 which reads as follows:
Glass Breakage – Hitting A Bird or Animal – Falling Objects Or Missiles
If you carry Comprehensive Coverage for the damaged covered “auto”, we will pay for the following under Comprehensive Coverage:a. Glass breakage;
a. Glass breakage;
b. “Loss” caused by hitting a bird or animal; andc
c. “Loss” caused by falling objects or missiles.
However, you have the option of having glass breakage caused by a covered “auto’s” collision or overturn considered a “loss” under Collision Coverage.
This paragraph is a clarification for certain types of losses, detailing which coverage will apply:
- If comprehensive is carried with or without collision, losses caused by (1) glass breakage, (2) collision with a bird or animal, (3) falling objects, or (4) missiles, may be considered covered by comprehensive coverage.
- If both comprehensive and collision are carried, the insured may choose to cover glass breakage under the collision coverage, in order to avoid the application of two deductibles.
- If collision is carried without comprehensive, glass breakage caused by collision, or contact with an animal or bird, or loss caused by falling objects or missiles, can be covered by collision.