Progressive Introduces Any Auto Commercial Liability Endorsement

Progressive introduced a new commercial auto endorsements that might limit an agent’s errors and omissions exposure, the insurer says.

Imagine this scenario — a customer has commercial auto insurance for his small business. Before it’s time to renew his policy, he buys a new truck, forgets to notify his insurance agent about it so that the agent can update his policy. Then the customer causes an accident.

“A scenario like that could raise errors and omissions issues for independent insurance agents,” said Mike Miller with Progressive’s commercial auto insurance group. But, according to Miller, a new endorsement — Any Auto Liability — could limit the agent’s exposure.

“An Any Auto Liability endorsement from Progressive can limit E&O exposure in those situations by filling the gap created when commercial auto insurance customers get new vehicles but don’t update their policy until it’s time to renew,” Miller said.

Progressive’s new Any Auto commercial auto insurance endorsement protects vehicles used by small business owners including:

• Owned vehicles, including those acquired in between policy periods but not yet listed on a policy;

• Non-owned vehicles, including vehicles being driven on behalf of the business, whether the driver works for the business or not; and

• Hired vehicles, such as vehicles a business owner occasionally rents when business volume picks up.

Progressive’s Any Auto Liability coverage is currently available to sole proprietors, partnerships and corporations in 23 states and is generally limited to businesses required to carry the coverage. It will expand nationwide throughout next year.

Source: Progressive,
www.progressivecommercial.com

Latest Comments

• July 27, 2009 at 2:40 am

  master u/w'er says:

  Wow, this is groundbreaking for anyone not using ISO standard coverages! Let's see, Symbol 1 ANY Auto has been around since the late 70's.
• July 24, 2009 at 9:16 am

  Stat Guy says:

  I guess the thrust of this is that it is supposed to limit E & O exposure and is not introducing "new" coverage. As Steve noted, this is not new at all but rather it is ind... read more
• July 23, 2009 at 6:34 am

  Agent says:

  I fail to see why the nose remark would seem appropriate... If this change was supposed to save E&O problems then it would appear that the article writer thought the coverage... read more