State Farm to exclude DE!
#16
Nordschleife Master
Originally Posted by 38D
Come on guys, this was clearly a loophole in many policies. Insurance companies never intended to cover DE accidents, they just had not seen enough of them to warrant the hassle of changing the language. Now with people regularly tracking & crashing $100k cars, it makes sense. I personally don't think the general public should be paying for us to go 150mph on a race track.
#17
Originally Posted by mooty
what does that mean for ppl who track race car?
do you use special insurance for racing or you self insure?
i dont trust insurance on track, i self insure. but i may goto dedicated race car too.
do you use special insurance for racing or you self insure?
i dont trust insurance on track, i self insure. but i may goto dedicated race car too.
#18
Nordschleife Master
Originally Posted by spazegun2213
I simply dont insure my 944, its not worth that much so i figured why bother.
#19
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
I may have been too cryptic. The waivers we sign with PCA, BMW CCA, and the like are our agreement that if another participant negligently (or even intentionally, I think) collides with our car that neither the participant nor the sponsoring club is liable to us for the damage. Given the waiver of liability, there should not be a good claim that might be subject to insurance. The claims I think the insurance companies are avoiding with the on-track exclusions are the claims by their own insureds, not defending their insureds against claims by other participants.
Anyway, that's what I think.
Were I to get a track car for DE (and maybe racing at some point), I would get a car that I could afford to write off entirely. (Probably not a 944, Matt, as I would expect that car to drive too differently from my GT3, but maybe a 964.)
Anyway, that's what I think.
Were I to get a track car for DE (and maybe racing at some point), I would get a car that I could afford to write off entirely. (Probably not a 944, Matt, as I would expect that car to drive too differently from my GT3, but maybe a 964.)
#20
Race Director
Originally Posted by spazegun2213
I simply dont insure my 944, its not worth that much so i figured why bother.
If wrecked my car is worth quite a bit more as parts than as complete car by the book. So I'd get maybe $1200 from insurance. Well short of a Joey Hand I think I could salvage alot more $$$ than that from a wadded up spec car.
As for needing isurance to get on the track. I have never been asked. Never in racing nor in DE. A race track is not a public road and as clearly stated now insurance would not cover you(collision or liability) anyway so insurance or not is irrelevant.
As for the liablility issue... Yes waiver should protect people, but that does not stop everyone. I am sure you are aware of the Carrera GT incident.
#21
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by M758
Yes waiver should protect people, but that does not stop everyone. I am sure you are aware of the Carrera GT incident.
#22
I'm compiling a wiki page on this topic which is easier for people to look at than trawl a couple of hundred forum posts It's here:
http://www.trackpedia.com/wiki/Does_...t_the_track%3F
If you have additional companies not paying out then please feel free to add them or PM me and I'll do it.
Thanks
http://www.trackpedia.com/wiki/Does_...t_the_track%3F
If you have additional companies not paying out then please feel free to add them or PM me and I'll do it.
Thanks
#23
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i was always under the impression that a race track is a de facto no fault zone, so a crash involving multiple cars couldnt assign blame to any one driver.
i think we may start to see more wrecked cars on the road that "mysteriously" spun and crashed no joke though, i've heard of people doing this before and i'll bet that these instances are going to increase if coverage is completely dropped from the track.
i think we may start to see more wrecked cars on the road that "mysteriously" spun and crashed no joke though, i've heard of people doing this before and i'll bet that these instances are going to increase if coverage is completely dropped from the track.
#24
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"There is no Physical Damage 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 on any road; or on a track designed primarily for racing or high-speed driving."
also note that the grammar here refers to a "contest" - meaning that there is no coverage for any "contest" of speed, racing, etc. on any road or race track. technically, a DE is not a contest. then again, the original poster said that the wording isn't finalized yet.
also note that the grammar here refers to a "contest" - meaning that there is no coverage for any "contest" of speed, racing, etc. on any road or race track. technically, a DE is not a contest. then again, the original poster said that the wording isn't finalized yet.
#26
Nordschleife Master
Originally Posted by penguinking
"There is no Physical Damage 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 on any road; or on a track designed primarily for racing or high-speed driving."
also note that the grammar here refers to a "contest" - meaning that there is no coverage for any "contest" of speed, racing, etc. on any road or race track. technically, a DE is not a contest. then again, the original poster said that the wording isn't finalized yet.
also note that the grammar here refers to a "contest" - meaning that there is no coverage for any "contest" of speed, racing, etc. on any road or race track. technically, a DE is not a contest. then again, the original poster said that the wording isn't finalized yet.
#27
Remember this incident?
This case is going to make all insurance companies close the "DE loop hole" ASAP. It will also jack the price of DEs substantially.
This case is going to make all insurance companies close the "DE loop hole" ASAP. It will also jack the price of DEs substantially.
#28
Originally Posted by 38D
More like you were paying X, but getting X+1.
Come on guys, this was clearly a loophole in many policies. Insurance companies never intended to cover DE accidents, they just had not seen enough of them to warrant the hassle of changing the language. Now with people regularly tracking & crashing $100k cars, it makes sense. I personally don't think the general public should be paying for us to go 150mph on a race track.
Come on guys, this was clearly a loophole in many policies. Insurance companies never intended to cover DE accidents, they just had not seen enough of them to warrant the hassle of changing the language. Now with people regularly tracking & crashing $100k cars, it makes sense. I personally don't think the general public should be paying for us to go 150mph on a race track.
Sad, but true.
If I owned and insurance company I'd close the loophole. I think it is beyond the spirit and intent of what they intend to cover.
Also, the crash rate on many of the new very powerfull cars like the Z06, Ford GT, is very high.
It seems like lately, at every open track event I'm seeing one high end car get crunched. A new Murci and a 360 spider to name a few. Totaled.
Last edited by Boulder GT3; 10-10-2006 at 10:44 PM.
#30
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by penguinking
thats actually not a bad idea. PCA should create a captive insurance company, problem solved.
I have Laurel DE ins. and it is good for (some) piece of mind.