Analysis brought to you by the policy experts at FC&S Online, the recognized authority on insurance coverage interpretation and analysis for the P&C industry. Visit National Underwriter website to find out more — or to have YOUR coverage question answered. Question: This query pertains to ERIE's personal auto policy. Here's the scenario:  The insured was involved in a collision loss. The airbags deployed. The insured carries comprehensive coverage but not collision coverage. Here is the policy language: ADDITIONAL PAYMENTS (No Deductible Applies to These Additional Payments) If Comprehensive Coverage and/or Collision coverage are purchased, "we" will: 4. pay all expenses necessary to replace a deployed airbag. OUR PROMISE — Collision Coverage If Collision Coverage is indicated on the "Declarations" "we" will pay for "loss" to an "auto we insure" and its equipment caused by collision or upset. If the "loss" is to an "owned auto we insure" "we" will only pay if "you" purchased Collision Coverage for the "owned auto we insure." "We" will pay for "loss" less the deductible shown on the "Declarations." Is there coverage for the deployed airbags under based on Additional Payments section since the qualifier for this section is for the insured to carry either comp or collision Coverage? Could this section act as its own insuring grant?  Also, does the collision coverage insurance agreement that immediately precedes the Additional Payments section serve to preclude coverage in this scenario to the point where the Additional Payments section would not come into play?

— Pennsylvania Subscriber

Answer: The additional coverage should supersede the statement under collision. The additional coverage is just that: additional. So it's an extra coverage added above the standard coverages. The airbag deployment should be covered.

Replacement airbags can cost thousands

Question: If airbags deploy because of hitting a pothole, is there coverage under a standard personal auto policy? If there is coverage, would it be collision or other than collision?

— West Virginia Subscriber

Answer: The majority opinion of courts is that hitting a pothole is a collision with another object, that is, the road. So we agree with that majority opinion. As for the airbags, the coverage under the PAP is for loss (not defined) of the auto and equipment. Airbags are certainly equipment and if they are deployed, they are lost in that they have to be reset in order for them to be usable again. So, we are of the opinion, that this was a direct and accidental loss of auto equipment and since there is no applicable exclusion, the PAP should apply.

Covering other auto equipment losses

Question: A question has arisen relative to snowplow blades affixed to a personal auto and the coverage aspect. If the snowplow blade is attached to the personal auto at the time it is damaged, would you consider it to be equipment of the auto and thus covered under the personal auto policy? If the blade is stored outside at the insured residence, not attached to a vehicle, would it be auto equipment or considered personal property under a homeowners policy?

— Iowa Subscriber

Answer: The standard PAP applies to the covered auto's "equipment." The policy does not specify that the equipment be on the vehicle at the time of loss. So, while it is attached to the vehicle, it is covered under the PAP. While not attached, it should still be covered under the PAP since it is still the vehicle's equipment since its utility is limited to being used on the vehicle.

Damage caused by voltage regulator failure

Question: An insured was driving his vehicle when he smelled smoke. He pulled over and found the voltage regulator had failed causing damage to the fuel gauge, temperature gauge, clock, and voltage regulator. The policy language states: EXCLUSIONS We will not pay for: Loss or damage caused by insects or vermin; inherent defect; dampness, mildew, mold, rot or rust; temperature extremes; mechanical or electrical breakdown or failure; wear and tear;gradual deterioration; or loss of use. We know the voltage regulator would not be covered as it is the cause of the loss, but would the resulting damage be covered?

— Pennsylvania Subscriber

Answer: Unlike the language on the standard PAP, which uses the "damage due and confined to'' phrase, the specific exclusionary policy language you provide clearly states the insurer will not pay for loss or damage "caused by… mechanical or electrical breakdown or failure." Thus, if it has been established that the damage to the fuel gauge, temperature gauge, clock, and voltage regulator were all caused by the breakdown of the voltage regulator, then all of that damage should be excluded. See also: 2018 auto insurance changes you should know