Insurance for Your Business

https://youtu.be/5TS1YqKrIYE?si=EK_jbf62rzKl8PYN

Insurance CRISIS | Americans Will Pay For California's Mistakes Insurance CRISIS | Americans Will Pay For California's MistakesPopular Video Content:🎥 US News: - http://bit.ly/USworldnews💰 Stocks & Finance: - https://bi...

A question looking for an answer - presented by Sifu Raymond Hwang
Several cars travelling along the East-West Highway were damaged by wild elephants. Would the Comprehensive Motor policy pay for the repairs? Due to accidental collision or malicious damage? We should introduce an add-on to cover damage caused by wildlife.

This is my answer to the claim position.

Points to establish for the claim:

1. Site of incidence -
1a. What was the legal usage of the site?
The East-West Highway was a public road for vehicles with valid road taxes driven by drivers with valid driving licenses. Expired driving licenses were still valid, and subjected to fines for their offenses of unpaid renewal dues.

1b. What was the legal status of the visitors or users on the site?
The cars are licensed to use on this highway as long as they have valid road taxes and their drivers have valid driving licenses as mentioned in !a above. The wild elephants were not legally allowed to use or be on the highway so their presence was an obstacle to the moving traffic of vehicles. The damages to the cars were due to collision with these animals. If they were not wild their owners would have to answer for the damages arising from these collisions. The damages could not be classified as malicious since they were not driven by a sound-minded human. Only a sound-minded human could think and cause hurt or damage to another with malicious intent. Animals only think of escaping and roaming.

1c. Was the site properly maintained?
Legally, any built-up structure, such as a building, and any land or natural structure that has been developed or disturbed by humans, its owner or operator is responsible for its upkeep to ensure safety to the public and their visitors or users. The highway was well maintained, as there were no potholes. Anyway, it was not the subject of the question.

1. Were there adequate measures taken to prevent trespassing or illegal entry of unwelcome elements that could endanger legal visitors or users.
The presence of wild elephants roaming about on the highway confirmed there were breaches in the fencing of the highway. So the owner/ operator, the highway authority had to bear the liability of the damages for not preventing the unwelcome animals from entering the highway which endangered the users.

2. Did the claimant within his ability take any action or precautionary measures to minimise or prevent further deterioration of his loss?
It was beyond the ability of the drivers to avoid the attacks by the roaming elephants except to pray for a path to clear to escape from these animals

3. The coverage of the insurance:
4a. Did the causes of the incidence fall under the coverage?
The claims for damages should be payable as the elephants’ presence on the highway was an obstacle to the traffic flow.

4b. Was there any breach?
There was no breach as the highway was for the use by vehicles, except for any vehicle without valid road tax.

There is no requirement to have a wild animal cover if the vehicle is solely used on roads or highways. The cover would be required for country paths or tracks in plantations or jungles.

https://youtu.be/if5vktFJ6jw?si=WijWHoq1QxfqeSp2

Citibank Issues Emergency Warning... (It's Urgent) CTA-Timer Pro (Trade with the Machines) $30/mo -- Only $1 a day with the first month free using the coupon code "FREEMONTH" at checkout or the link below. Li...