Towing Means Use under Farm Policy?

We insure a farmer on form FP 00 10 09 94. Included in this policy is coverage E, Scheduled Farm Personal Property. Under coverage E, we have specified $7,000 for a 1984 Case tractor, model 1490.

Our insured was working in his field using the tractor attached to an implement. While the tractor was in use, the “top hitch” broke and allowed the implement to swing into the tractor, puncturing the transmission housing as well as two tires and tubes.

The insurer has denied the claim, citing the limitation under coverage “l”, damage to covered farm machinery. That section eliminates coverage for loss “caused by contact between a tractor and implement during towing, hitching, or unhitching.”

Our insured points out — and we agree with him — that the word “towing” implies the act of moving an implement from one location to another for the purpose of using the implement elsewhere on the farm. We do not believe that the undefined term “towing” should be broadened to include “using.” If the authors of the policy had intended to exclude all collisions between an implement and a tractor, they could have simply omitted the phrase “during towing, hitching, or unhitching.”

May we have your thoughts?

Kentucky Subscriber

As you said, form FP 00 10 09 94 excludes collision coverage for a tractor due to “contact between a tractor and implement during towing, hitching, or unhitching.” Hitching and unhitching are clear; they mean when the implement is being hooked to or detached from the tractor.

“Towing” may be open to different interpretations. For one, the definition the insurer is trying to use in this case: Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary defines the verb “to tow” as “to draw or pull along behind.” However, the definition in Webster's Third International Dictionary supports your contention, since one of the definitions is “to draw (as a ship or disabled auto) or pull along behind by a rope or chain.” This definition implies the entity being towed is not in service or is in need of repairs.

In a literal sense, a farmer is “towing” the implement whenever it is being pulled by a tractor. However, that interpretation of the word would then exclude all such collisions, like the one you describe. If the authors had wanted to exclude all collisions between a tractor and an implement during use, there was no need to specify “towing, hitching, or unhitching.” Rather, they could have just said that such collisions are not covered during “use, hitching, or unhitching.”

By specifying “towing” as an excluded situation, the authors have made it clear that they are using “towing” in the more narrow sense of transporting from one place to another, rather than normal usage.

The damage to the tractor you described in your letter is covered by the FP 00 10.

 

This premium content is locked for FC&S Coverage Interpretation Subscribers

Enjoy unlimited access to the trusted solution for successful interpretation and analyses of complex insurance policies.

  • Quality content from industry experts with over 60 years insurance experience, combined
  • Customizable alerts of changes in relevant policies and trends
  • Search and navigate Q&As to find answers to your specific questions
  • Filter by article, discussion, analysis and more to find the exact information you’re looking for
  • Continually updated to bring you the latest reports, trending topics, and coverage analysis