dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
2147
Brim77
join:2012-03-16
Lansing, MI

Brim77

Member

[Help] Hitting a deer in Michigan is collision not comprehensive?

I work for Enterprise. Currently I'm one of the low men on the totem pole, but one of the perks of getting promoted high enough in the company you get to drive a company car home from the lot at the end of the day. Well, my branch's newly promoted manager hit a deer last week on her way home. Now our region's risk manager has contacted her and said that she owes Enterprise $500 for hitting the deer.

Enterprise is a self insured company and they paid out of pocket the $1500 in damages to the car, but isn't hitting a deer considered comprehensive? She printed out the region's official driving policy and under Employee Responsibility it states:

"For all losses (excluding the first comprehensive loss) while on commute or personal use, the employee is responsible for the first $500 of all unrecovered costs (unless prohibited by state law), and is subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination."

When she replied to our risk manager's request for permission to deduct $500 directly from her paycheck she said, "The policy says that I don't pay for the first comprehensive loss, why am I being charged for a deer hit?" Our risk manager told her that comprehensive loss under the Employee Driving Program is considered to be damage to tires and rims only, and that damage from animals is considered collision.

Any advice on how to fight this?

MEDIAN2k3
Your Ad Here
Premium Member
join:2002-12-04
Howard Beach, NY

MEDIAN2k3

Premium Member

The fact that they asked permission to deduct it from her paycheck is fishy, if its company policy they would have notified her of the deduction and wouldn't ask for her permission, tell her to contact the ceo's office if anything or somewhere higher up to get clarity on this policy.

Seems like the risk person assigned is playing wet and loose.
nonymous (banned)
join:2003-09-08
Glendale, AZ

nonymous (banned) to Brim77

Member

to Brim77
Never worked for a company that would charge me for an accident. Always reserved the up too termination though.
A deer may or may not be avoidable.

michieru
Premium Member
join:2009-07-25
Denver, CO

michieru to Brim77

Premium Member

to Brim77
Was the policy regarding the employee driving program given to her in writing? Did she sign anything regarding the terms of this program? If not I would say it's an HR issue.

mattmag

join:2000-04-09
NW Illinois

1 recommendation

mattmag to Brim77

to Brim77


I guess if they are "self-insured" then they can write the rules as they see fit. In nearly every case I am familiar with, car vs deer is covered under comprehensive, but if you try to avoid the deer and hit something else in the process it is of course collision.
tcope
Premium Member
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT

tcope to Brim77

Premium Member

to Brim77
You mention in your post that the risk manager stated the employee policy explained that comprehensive accidents are tire and wheels only. Is this correct?

BTW, when a wheel or tire hits something a traditional carrier should consider that a collision claim.

Traditional insurance polices do consider collision with an animal to be addressed under collision coverage. But we are not talking about an insurance policy here. It's a employee agreement contract.

They are asking about payroll deduction as it might become a legal issue to just deduct the $500 from someone's pay. ERAC would really need to pursue the personal legally before they could/should payroll deduct. They are giving the employee the option to allow the amount owed to be deducted from payroll. It's either that or the employee pays the $500 up front.

This is different then using a company car (or even your own) for work, Companies usually don't charge the employee for damage in those cases. This is a situation where ERAC allows employee to use cars that are sitting around and not rented out. In return the agreement is that the employee pay $500 if they damage those vehicles. Employees would just be using the cars for their own personal use, not work.
raythompsontn
join:2001-01-11
Oliver Springs, TN

raythompsontn to Brim77

Member

to Brim77
Collision is colliding with another object, in this case an animal. Comprehensive is for fire, theft and other damage such as a tree limb falling on the car.

The company policy is what it is. She could be terminated according the policy. Best course of action is to pay and keep the job. Fighting it will always turn out in the company's favor because of the text about termination.
tcope
Premium Member
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT

2 recommendations

tcope

Premium Member

said by raythompsontn:

Collision is colliding with another object, in this case an animal. Comprehensive is for fire, theft and other damage such as a tree limb falling on the car.

In an insurance policy collision with an animal is covered under comprehensive coverage. Same thing is true of colliding with a falling object.

Jim Gurd
Premium Member
join:2000-07-08
Livonia, MI

Jim Gurd to Brim77

Premium Member

to Brim77
said by Brim77:

isn't hitting a deer considered comprehensive?

I believe it is.
said by Brim77:

For all losses (excluding the first comprehensive loss) while on commute or personal use, the employee is responsible for the first $500 of all unrecovered costs (unless prohibited by state law),

I'm not sure they can legally change the definition of comprehensive and collision as defined in state law in their agreement.

Why doesn't his or her personal auto insurance cover this? It should cover any vehicle legally driven by this person.
Jim Gurd

Jim Gurd

Premium Member

said by Brim77:

(unless prohibited by state law)

My argument would be that under state law this is considered a comprehensive claim, not collision.
tcope
Premium Member
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT

tcope

Premium Member

Again, we are not talking about an insurance policy. It's an employee contract.

bmilone2
join:2001-01-26
Mays Landing, NJ

bmilone2

Member

said by tcope:

Again, we are not talking about an insurance policy. It's an employee contract.

+1
rody_44
Premium Member
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA

2 edits

rody_44 to Brim77

Premium Member

to Brim77
Count me in the it doesnt matter. Hitting a deer is a lot like hitting a person. Thats collision not comprehensive. While comprehensive covers your car for damage from animals. Hitting a deer when driving isnt really the same thing as a monkey getting loose in your parked car or a raccoon taking a trip across your hood. Is her fighting it really worth everyone losing the ability to take cars home. In any case it seems this is the relevant point.

Employee Driving Program is considered to be damage to tires and rims only, and that damage from animals is considered collision.

mattmag

join:2000-04-09
NW Illinois

mattmag

said by rody_44:

Hitting a deer is a lot like hitting a person. Thats collision not comprehensive.

That may be your opinion, but it isn't what the insurance companies say. From Allstate's website, to just quote one:

"As far as your auto insurance company is concerned, hitting a deer is typically a covered loss. Comprehensive coverage typically provides this protection and often actually stipulates that collision with a bird or animal is covered. Some states may let you choose whether you want to have these losses paid under collision or comprehensive coverage. Since this is a not at "fault" type of loss, your insurer is likely to process this through your comprehensive insurance coverage."

And:

"Here's a quick refresher of auto insurance coverage types:

Comprehensive Coverage—helps pay for damages on covered costs that aren't caused by a collision like storm damage, a rock hitting your windshield, or in this case, deer.

Collision Coverage—helps pay for vehicle repairs if you're involved in a collision with another object.

It's important to note that for a deer accident to be considered a comprehensive loss there must be physical contact with the deer—otherwise it will likely be processed as a collision loss."

»www.allstate.com/tools-a ··· ent.aspx

Count me in the "Their view is the only one that matters" group.
rody_44
Premium Member
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA

2 edits

rody_44

Premium Member

Did a little checking and you are correct its usually comprehensive. Of course allstates view doesnt matter since its a employee contract that decides it. While he could probably fight it and win in court i dont even think the company is obligated to apply insurance law to losses.

Comprehensive coverage:
Coverage that pays for damages to your vehicle resulting from a covered loss other than a collision, such as fire, theft, vandalism or contact with persons, animals, birds or falling objects.

RRedline
Rated R
Premium Member
join:2002-05-15
USA

RRedline to Brim77

Premium Member

to Brim77
In PA, I believe hitting an animal is considered to be collision if the animal was not moving (dead on the road), and comprehensive if it was moving (ran out in front of you).
tcope
Premium Member
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT

tcope

Premium Member

Insurance specifically names, collision with an animal, as comprehensive coverage. It does not matter is the deer was alive dead, running, standing, etc.

Rungel
Run A Mile Live Awhile
Premium Member
join:2001-12-05
united state

Rungel to Brim77

Premium Member

to Brim77
Here in Conn. The state police told me it's comprehensive .. it's an act of god.. i do know people who got screwed on it with the insurance company calling it under collision .. some will try that

Pacrat
Old and Cranky
MVM
join:2001-03-10
Cortland, OH

Pacrat to Brim77

MVM

to Brim77
There are some nit-picky interpretations of the difference between collision and comprehensive. If you strike a deer with the front of your car while driving, it's collision. If a deer jumps into the side of your vehicle as your drive down the road, it's comprehensive.
raythompsontn
join:2001-01-11
Oliver Springs, TN

raythompsontn to tcope

Member

to tcope
Not what my insurance did for me. I hit a deer, significant damage. Insurance company said it was collision and charged me the deductible. May vary by company and state.
tcope
Premium Member
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT

tcope

Premium Member

Comprehensive as well as collision coverage almost always both have deductibles. So in that you were "charged" a deductible does not automatically mean the loss was not covered under comprehensive coverage. I suspect it was actually considered as a comprehensive loss and not collision. It does not vary state to state, it varies policy to policy and I've never seen nor heard of a policy that does not treat animal collision under comprehensive coverage.
LittleBill
join:2013-05-24

LittleBill to Brim77

Member

to Brim77
i hit a deer last month in PA. it was comprehensive. Period
Brim77
join:2012-03-16
Lansing, MI

Brim77

Member

Update: I took Median2k3's advice and told my co-worker just to ignore the request and refuse to sign the authorization, and she did. Three months later no one has taken any money out of her paycheck.