Driver's Education
Club Racing
Member List
RSS
Help
02-22-2008, 05:06 AM
I too have been following the Track Insurance threads on various boards and I'm really concerned about how comprehensive the coverages will be this year. It seems the insurance companies had to pay out a lot of claims and the policies did not prove to be as profitable as they orginially projected.
The option the insurance companies had was to either: a) Raise the premiums in order to better cover their losses, or, b) Maintain the same policy premium, but decrease the effective coverage to the insured by adding more exclusions to the policy.
The latter is the choice I believe many of them will follow for several reasons. By raising the premiums too high they will lose a significant amount of customers who will eventually decide to become self insured.
So by adding more exclusions to their policy and maintaining a level premium amount, they can add legal techno-babble language to the policy that few track enthusiats can fully understand. This will serve to better limit the insurance companies risk exposure.
Bottom line: The coverages effectively would not be the same as in previous past policies.
Looking at the realities, there is a higher probability of having an off, or worse, in wet weather conditions than in dry conditions. To better manage the risk, some drivers may elect to limit their track time in wet weather conditions, or procure a significantly less costly wet weather track vehicle. So, if the lesser car had an incident the losses would be sustainable.
This not to say an incident cannot occur in dry conditions, but it is only one part of this complicated decision-making equation.
The jury is still out whether I pull the trigger on track insurance this year, or not. Last year for me it was a no-brainer to do so, however, the rules of the game have changed.
The option the insurance companies had was to either: a) Raise the premiums in order to better cover their losses, or, b) Maintain the same policy premium, but decrease the effective coverage to the insured by adding more exclusions to the policy.
The latter is the choice I believe many of them will follow for several reasons. By raising the premiums too high they will lose a significant amount of customers who will eventually decide to become self insured.
So by adding more exclusions to their policy and maintaining a level premium amount, they can add legal techno-babble language to the policy that few track enthusiats can fully understand. This will serve to better limit the insurance companies risk exposure.
Bottom line: The coverages effectively would not be the same as in previous past policies.
Looking at the realities, there is a higher probability of having an off, or worse, in wet weather conditions than in dry conditions. To better manage the risk, some drivers may elect to limit their track time in wet weather conditions, or procure a significantly less costly wet weather track vehicle. So, if the lesser car had an incident the losses would be sustainable.
This not to say an incident cannot occur in dry conditions, but it is only one part of this complicated decision-making equation.
The jury is still out whether I pull the trigger on track insurance this year, or not. Last year for me it was a no-brainer to do so, however, the rules of the game have changed.
.