Garagekeepers Symbol 30 Requires Employee Payment for Services

We have a client that owns a restaurant with valet parking service. He wants to insure his responsibility for the automobiles in his care, custody, and control. I suggest a garagekeepers coverage, but symbol 30 implies that customers have to pay for the service in order to provide coverage. My suggestion is to amend that requirement, but insurer requested symbol 29, which is for liability coverage. Do you have any comment that would help us to clarify this situation.

Puerto Rico Subscriber

The unendorsed CGL form CG 00 01 includes an exception to the auto exclusion that provides coverage for liability arising from the parking of autos on or adjacent to premises owned or rented to the named insured. So, as long as the valet parking is done on the named insured's premises or adjacent to it, liability coverage is provided.

However, this does not provide physical damage for the cars themselves. As you suggest, garagekeepers coverage is required for that. The requirements under symbol 30 for payment applies only to vehicles owned by “employees” and members of their households that are left for safekeeping. So, if employee vehicles must be covered this would not be appropriate unless they pay for the service. Non-employee customers are not required to pay in order for symbol 30 to apply to their vehicles.