Progressive Introduces Any Auto Commercial Liability Endorsement

July 23, 2009

  • July 23, 2009 at 12:30 pm
    Steve says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    This coverage feature has been a part of commercial auto insurance for generations. So what. Congratulations on adopting an industry convention, Progressive.

  • July 23, 2009 at 12:32 pm
    Agent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Although I fail to see why it would be the agent’s fault if a customer replaces a vehicle without notification, I think Progressive is on to something here. People can let some things slip through the cracks, and this prevents major problems later. A progressive idea…

  • July 23, 2009 at 12:34 pm
    LCA says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Is this different from symbol 1? Do you use 1, 8 & 9 or just 1? I agree this would not be an agent’s E&O but never know what a jury might do.

  • July 23, 2009 at 12:44 pm
    Wow says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Wow, big deal… I would be embarrassed to announce that this wasn’t available previously.

  • July 23, 2009 at 12:54 pm
    Agentman says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I too fail to see how its the agent’s fault if an insured fails to notify the company of a new vehicle. The jury will almost always side with the insured, because as the old saying goes “a jury is a group of people that couldn’t think of a good enough excuse to get out of jury duty”. Thus most of the jurers will have the “insurance is a SCAM” mentaility.

  • July 23, 2009 at 12:56 pm
    Smitty says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Symbol 1 means any auto. Thus, 8 & 9 would be redundant if used with symbol 1.

  • July 23, 2009 at 1:01 am
    LCA says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Thanks – glad I wasn’t missing anything! Maybe Progressive just has a better PR dept so they can say “And now for something completely different.”

  • July 23, 2009 at 1:49 am
    Claim Guy says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    So Progressive, since you are in a way calling this new groundbreaking endorsement E&O coverage for the agent, who pays for the endorsement? Or is it a free’B? The scenario that is most common when dealing with commercial accounts is the Agent was told by the insured and failed to notify the carrier (oops!) That is until a loss happens…..

  • July 23, 2009 at 4:00 am
    mark says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    could you have your nose any futher up the company’s ***

  • July 23, 2009 at 5:20 am
    What the heck says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Wait a second…

    Am I reading this correctly? Are they saying that Hired Auto/Non-Owned Auto was never offered before?

    As Keith Jackson used to say, “Whoah Nelly…”

  • July 23, 2009 at 5:21 am
    What the heck says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Wait a second…

    Am I reading this correctly? Are they saying that Hired Auto/Non-Owned Auto was never offered before?

    As Keith Jackson used to say, “Whoah Nelly…”

  • July 23, 2009 at 6:34 am
    Agent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    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 was something new and improved and might save us from people who could not get out of jury duty. I do not know what all companies do, but there must have been E&O problems from vehicle changes or the article would not have been written. Apparently this was not a 100% industry standard?

  • July 24, 2009 at 9:16 am
    Stat Guy says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    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 industry practice; our underwriters would agree to cover all autos owned or not that the insured uses, even when they forget to notify us until after a loss. Deny coverage like that and you’ll be loosing an account. But when you think of it, no one would sue an agent, if the company doesn’t deny coverage after a loss because of the failure to notify? This is just more PR targeted at agents, not insureds.

  • July 27, 2009 at 2:40 am
    master u/w'er says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    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.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*