Pump the brakes: Is auto racing covered?
As always, when dealing with insurance policies, semantics are important.
Americans have long had a love affair with cars, particularly fast ones. Many car enthusiasts collect muscle cars and compare horsepower, torque and other performance metrics with each other. Not only do Americans love performance vehicles, they like to go fast. There are Facebook groups for owners of certain cars where owners discuss speed and passing others. Hollywood has long realized this. From the “Cannonball Run” movie in 1981 to “The Fast and the Furious” franchise, which is on its ninth film with “Fast and Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw,” and two other movies planned for 2020 and 2021, we can’t get enough of fast cars.
However, speeding in a vehicle is dangerous. Studies have shown that the faster a car is going, the higher the chances are that there will be severe injuries or fatalities in the event of an accident. Therefore, insurance companies do not provide coverage for racing activities.
‘Speeding’ versus ‘racing’
As always, the devil is in the details, and a recent question from a subscriber highlights that issue. Our subscriber drove a high-performance vehicle through Xtreme Xperience, which allows people to take a brief class and then head out onto the track in cars such as a Porsche 911 GT3, Lamborghini Huracan LP610-4, Ferrari 458 Italia or other exotic vehicles.
Being in the insurance industry, he asked his carrier that if anything had happened in the vehicle, would his umbrella policy have provided coverage. His carrier’s answer was ‘no.’ Stating that the activity fell under their policy’s racing, speed, demolition or stunting exclusion, which reads in part that “damage caused while using any automobile while practicing for or participating in any prearranged or organized racing, speed, demolition or stunting content or activity.” The carrier also referred to the Xtreme Xperience website that clearly states that an individual’s insurance will not provide coverage and that it is necessary to buy one of their insurance packages for potential damage to the vehicle.
Our subscriber disagreed with the carrier and asked for our opinion. Driving the exotic cars on a racetrack is not a racing activity; there is no prize for first place, and the drivers are not allowed to pass each other without the consent of the professional riding along with the driver for guidance. Therefore, it is not a racing activity, but it is a speed activity since the point of the activity is to go faster than one is allowed to drive on public roads.
We could see our subscriber’s point and were ready to agree with him, but upon reviewing the policy language realized that it didn’t just exclude racing activity but speed activity. We had to agree with the carrier because of that wording; it is broad enough to exclude not just racing, but speed or demolition activity or contests. That is not the standard ISO wording, so we pulled up the ISO auto and umbrella policies.
Under the ISO Personal Auto Policy, the exclusion is worded differently. A loss for a covered auto or non-owned auto that is located inside a facility designed for racing, for the purpose of participating, competing in, practicing or preparing for any prearranged or organized racing or speed contest, or driver skill training or event is excluded. Let’s break this down.
First, the vehicle must be inside a facility designed for racing. Since Xtreme Xperience obtains access to race tracks for these activities, that is the first point. Next, we need to look at what is excluded: racing or speed contest, or driver skill activity or training. ‘Contest’ is not defined, so we go to the dictionary. Merriam Webster online defines contest as a struggle for victory or superiority, a competition. In the situation presented, the subscriber was not competing against anyone or even a clock; he was driving for the fun of it.
Let’s look at the next section, driver skill activity or training. While participants were given a brief class, the purpose of the class was not to improve their driving skills or teach them driver skills they can use daily on the road. The training is specific to that particular activity only, racing fundamentals and safety. It is not applicable to everyday driving, and a case could be made that this clause is ambiguous; therefore, the insured should get the benefit of the doubt.
Since the question regarded the subscriber’s Umbrella policy, we looked at the ISO wording as well. The wording is almost identical to the wording in the auto policy. The exclusion applied to racing or speed contests, or driver skill training or a driver skill event. It does not limit the exclusion to the vehicles being inside a facility designed for racing activity. This is important; since the auto policy does include that limitation, if an insured is street racing and has an accident, there could be coverage for the loss under the auto policy.
However, under the umbrella policy, there is no coverage for that same loss as the umbrella exclusion is not restricted to activity inside a racing facility. It is easy to overlook the gap in the exclusion in the auto policy; it is often assumed that all racing is excluded, but that is not the case, only racing inside a facility designed for racing. If the insured participates in a spur of the moment street race that wasn’t prearranged and had an accident, there is coverage under the personal auto policy.
As always, when dealing with insurance policies, semantics is important. The addition or removal of one or two words can change coverage in an instant. All sections of a policy must be reviewed to ensure that there are no exceptions to the exclusions or any exclusions built into the coverage sections.
Christine G. Barlow, CPCU, (cbarlow@alm.com) is managing editor of FC&S Expert Coverage Interpretation, the authority on insurance coverage interpretation and analysis for the P&C industry.
Related: