Maybe cynical, BUT, remember insurance companies are not in the business to
give you money, they are there to collect premiums. I have seen too much
of how the company spends a gread deal of effort to exclude as much as
possilbe at payments time and include much at premium time.
Ask for it in writting, find out what happened in other cases, and when you
can "self-insure".
Chris opr VE7HCB
At 10:15 AM 2002-05-08 -0400, JBaumgarte@aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 5/8/2002 8:49:00 AM Central Daylight Time, K7LXC@aol.com
>writes:
>
>
> > .
> >
> > Yes - verify. But towers are almost always covered either as an
> > additional structure or personal property. The insurance company can call
> > it
> > whatever they like but the bottom line is that they're still covered.
> >
> >
>
>However, big difference in what you might get from a claim in which the
>company called your tower "personal property." Unless you have a special
>endorsement, personal property is often subject to depreciation, but
>additional structures are not! You might have to insist that the claims
>person consider the tower as a "appurtenant private structure" and not
>subject to depreciation.
>
>John, N0IJ
|