Vehicle's Wiring System Damaged During Windshield Installation

 

April 1, 2014

 

The insured has a GCL policy subject to policy form CG 00 01 12 04 for his mobile vehicle window installation business. The insured was hired by the claimant to replace the windshield on his vehicle at the claimant's home. After removing the existing windshield, the insured used a sharp tool to remove the old urethane glue from the window molding. While using the tool, the insured accidentally damaged the wiring harness located nearby that connects the Bluetooth and other items to the vehicle's electrical/computer system.

 

We do not believe that the CCC exclusion applies in this case as the insured was working at the claimant's home and it could be argued that the vehicle was not actually in the insured care. Do Underwriters agree with that assessment?

 

It would appear that exclusion j. 6 is relevant in this case to preclude coverage for any damage caused to the window molding while the insured was removing the old urethane glue, as that is what the insured was working on at the time.

 

Do Underwriters also believe that j. 6. would apply to preclude coverage for the damage caused to the wiring harness due to the fact that the insured intentionally used the tool to scrape the material, regardless of the fact that he accidentally went too deep and thereby caused damage to the wire harness underneath, or would there be a potential for coverage for the damaged wiring harness?

 

South Carolina Subscriber

Exclusion (j.4) precludes coverage for damage to property in the insured's CCC. So, if the window repair company is a corporation or partnership, and an employee was working on the vehicle, the exclusion could void coverage for a claim against the employee but not the corporation. However, if the repair company is a sole proprietorship and the sole proprietor was working on the vehicle, the exclusion could apply if CCC is established.

 

Whether or not the CCC applies in this instance depends upon the totality of the circumstances. The fact that the vehicle was not on insured's premises, alone, is not determinative. Other factors to be considered include whether or not the insured had the keys to the vehicle, whether the owner of the vehicle was present, etc.

 

Lastly, we agree that exclusion j.(6) would apply to preclude coverage for any damage to the window molding, as that is what the insured was working on at the time. However, there will be coverage for damage done to the wiring harness. A mistake was made, but insured removed the window as insured was hired to do.