Insuranse rejects a claim on the basis that e-bike is a motorized vehicle.
- Thread starter MaxNevermind
- Start date
Sparky731
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
there is another thread on this subject under “Bike Insurance.”
Class 2s are an issue re: throttle control. Hard to get around that.
Conversely, State Farm will cover a Class 3 as a motorcycle which is actually cheaper than an ebike. I could have saved $160.
Class 2s are an issue re: throttle control. Hard to get around that.
Conversely, State Farm will cover a Class 3 as a motorcycle which is actually cheaper than an ebike. I could have saved $160.
PedalUma
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Petaluma, CA
Class 3 is legally a bicycle, just like any other bicycle. Unlawful modifications to throttle vehicles are separate topics, because those are not bikes. They are unsafe, illegal devices when in public. If you want to use a doctored unlawful one at your own peril when on your private ranch, fine. I wouldn't insure one.
m@Robertson
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
None of this philosophical stuff matters to the OP and his case. The SOLE issue is whether the language of 3.b. is accurate to his vehicle. Is the bike designed to be operated "SOLELY" on throttle? Without question that answer is no. Its designed to be operated by pedals and muscles alone, pedals and electrical assist, or motor only. The very existence of options eliminates the possibility of the policy language applying to his purchase of a retail ebike.
And further, the claims rep cited this clause as the reason for the coverage denial. So there isn't something hiding somewhere else that piles on here.
Worth noting: Sondors MXS has a specific conversion procedure from Class 2 to Class 3 and that procedure includes removal of the throttle. So just the fact that a bike can be converted from 2 to 3 is not on its face evidence of legal non compliance. I have no idea if Juiced went to this length ... but maybe they did.
And further, the claims rep cited this clause as the reason for the coverage denial. So there isn't something hiding somewhere else that piles on here.
Worth noting: Sondors MXS has a specific conversion procedure from Class 2 to Class 3 and that procedure includes removal of the throttle. So just the fact that a bike can be converted from 2 to 3 is not on its face evidence of legal non compliance. I have no idea if Juiced went to this length ... but maybe they did.
theemartymac
Well-Known Member
And furthermore, if you unplug the throttle, the bicycle still functions as designed. You can't do that to a moped or motorcycle. I would definitely challenge that interpretation.
And as an aside, those who are quick to try and get their ebikes registered as mopeds or motorcycles because it's 'simpler', should be fully aware that is setting a bad precedent that could be used by communities/associations to place further limits on where we can ride. We should be pushing harder on the recognition of these as standard bicycles, not drawing them deeper into the world of motor vehicle registration and regulation...
Sparky731
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
This may be the wrong forum, but will ask anyway: Has anyone been ticketed for riding an ebike anywhere?
If so, what was the violation?
I totally recognize legalities, and was stopped twice this year and asked to provide my trail pass (which I always have), but want to know if local authorities are patrolling and to what levels.
My stops were by DNR Wardens on State trails and could not have cared less about the bike I was riding.
If so, what was the violation?
I totally recognize legalities, and was stopped twice this year and asked to provide my trail pass (which I always have), but want to know if local authorities are patrolling and to what levels.
My stops were by DNR Wardens on State trails and could not have cared less about the bike I was riding.
DaveMatthews
Well-Known Member
Not so far, and I don't expect it.
JRA
Well-Known Member
As far as I have seen it is more likely you will run into a rabid cyclist that thinks ebikes are Satan
and give you a hard time
Ebiker01
Well-Known Member
Q- who would even steal A Juiced ebike ?? That thief has prob. already made a profile here on EBR looking for help fixing it...
On a more serious note :
Next time and always, lock it to a BIG lamp post with :
2 ABUS Granite XTREME locks and preferably also 1 Praxis 22mm chain, 1 front disc lock , 2 Apple Airtags in the frame/battery. And top it off with a moto bike cover .
THAT is your insurance .
smthng. thick like that : https://www.ebay.com/itm/202654671592
Q for the insiders : At what price would the insurance settle or agree ? The price it was bought for in the beggining or the actual market price for a new ebike ? b/c due to the high inflation , the latter current price would be better for costumers.
-
On a more serious note :
Next time and always, lock it to a BIG lamp post with :
2 ABUS Granite XTREME locks and preferably also 1 Praxis 22mm chain, 1 front disc lock , 2 Apple Airtags in the frame/battery. And top it off with a moto bike cover .
THAT is your insurance .
smthng. thick like that : https://www.ebay.com/itm/202654671592
Q for the insiders : At what price would the insurance settle or agree ? The price it was bought for in the beggining or the actual market price for a new ebike ? b/c due to the high inflation , the latter current price would be better for costumers.
-
ActionJackson
Well-Known Member
- Region
- Asia
- City
- Tokyo
Up until the mid ‘90s GEICO was a cut rate car insurance outfit for Government employees and active duty military. I had a policy with them for maybe a dozen years and they had cheap rates and great claim services. Then Berkshire Hathaway bought out the company and expanded it, in the process taking it from a great car insurance company to a general cheap insurance company designed to mostly provide liability insurance and rake in the cash for Warren Buffett. Helped make him very rich indeed. They suck at insurance though.
dodgeman
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Macomb, Illinois
The OP needs to decide if it’s worth fighting them. Worth getting a lawyer? Probably not. Worth small claims court? Maybe but most people don’t want the hassle. Worth finding another insurance company? They wouldn’t get any more of my money.
m@Robertson
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
This totally depends on the 'valuation basis' written up somewhere in the policy. Its going to be one of three things. I am betting on 'Actual Cash Value' or 'Stated Value'.
I wrote an article on the differences here with respect to why those things suck vs. Agreed Value, which is almost certainly what the GEICO policy is not. I have seen policies warranted to be Agreed Value but when you dig in and know what to look for, it contains an escape clause.
Even though the subject here is car insurance, the principles are identical and I do go into ACV, which is the most likely basis to be used here.
What is the difference between Agreed Value vs. Stated Value
What is Agreed Value Classic Car Insurance? This coverage and the alternatives - like Stated Value - are explained fully here.
www.lelandwest.com
FYI Velosurance / Markel is 'Stated Value' but after a detailed discussion with an underwriter I let it slide as I believe them when they say fighting over an ebike's value is not in their best interest. There's not enough there to fight over. A company like GEICO on the other hand can be expected to take a hard line vs. a specialty carrier whose reputation can be seriously affected by something that is a teeny niche to a big general-marketplace carrier.
I think this can be handled from an entirely different angle that is of no cost to the customer. This comes from being in the business and knowing who fears what. Not a certainty but absolutely better than going the route of an attorney or court. If the process I am recommending falls flat then either go to small claims (the carrier will likely appeal it up to municipal court where they can bring in a lawyer) or give it up. A regulatory complaint on the other hand can grow a life of its own.
Dewey
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Arlington, Virginia
Yes, ebikes were last summer banned from the Hudson River Greenway bike path in New York City, and photos are periodically posted to twitter showing NYPD ticketing ebike riders when they are doing spot checks, for example last month.
m@Robertson
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
but lest we all forget NYS and NYC in particular is damn near the only place in the country where the Bicycle Police exist as an active, organized effort, thanks to a state with a uniquely bizarre take on ebikes. the origin of their persecution in NYC at least has been documented and has nothing to do with their actual track record for safety.
They got rid of the governor who was down on them. Lets see how long it lasts when His Nibs the Mayor terms out.
PedalUma
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Petaluma, CA
Both of these are true in this situation described in the OP.
".. An adjuster says that e-bikes with a throttle are considered a motorized vehicle and there is an exception for those in my policy. I did some quick research and some articles saying that e-bikes are treated as usual bikes by California law."
I will take the second part first. Class 1, 2 & 3 eBikes are just bikes in California and not motor vehicles. The problem here is that yours did not fit into those classes, so it is not a bike in-law. Your conveyance was designed so that it could be operated for example with a broken or missing chain or broken or missing pedals or gears, at speeds over 20Mph. In other words, it could be operated without pedal power at those higher speeds. To quote the policy exclusion, a conveyance "that is designed to be operated solely by use of the power from the electrical system.." The problem is that the "bike" was left unlocked. To quote you, "class 2 by default with unlock." It is the unlock that turned it into a motor vehicle, letting the insurance company off the hook. I am sorry for your loss.
".. An adjuster says that e-bikes with a throttle are considered a motorized vehicle and there is an exception for those in my policy. I did some quick research and some articles saying that e-bikes are treated as usual bikes by California law."
I will take the second part first. Class 1, 2 & 3 eBikes are just bikes in California and not motor vehicles. The problem here is that yours did not fit into those classes, so it is not a bike in-law. Your conveyance was designed so that it could be operated for example with a broken or missing chain or broken or missing pedals or gears, at speeds over 20Mph. In other words, it could be operated without pedal power at those higher speeds. To quote the policy exclusion, a conveyance "that is designed to be operated solely by use of the power from the electrical system.." The problem is that the "bike" was left unlocked. To quote you, "class 2 by default with unlock." It is the unlock that turned it into a motor vehicle, letting the insurance company off the hook. I am sorry for your loss.
Ebiker01
Well-Known Member
Scooters too, and they stopped mine on that bike path right by the Citybike HQ near the HR Greenway bike path, i chalenged them as to why Citybike is allowed (they have an ebike rack right there
); The park officer came out with an excuse that they were going into a mediation with them , I'm not sure what happened later on .Q for Citybike: How can you have your ebikes
on a path where it is illegal ? You guys are special somehow
? All the bikes/ebikes are broken anyway I don't see who would be riding them...Attachments
TomD
Well-Known Member
Yup, also coming from a background in the biz, insurance companies do NOT want to deal with state regulator complaints. Give the adjuster one last chance to reconsider, and make it clear you will be filing a complaint if they deny your claim on grounds it is a motorized land conveyance simply because of throttle. Class 2 bikes have throttle and are street legal, thus not motorized land conveyances.
BlackHand
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Western WA
Does Geico's definition of motorized land conveyance need to be spelled out in the policy or is there an industry accepted understanding of what that is? It sure seems like a catch all phrase so they don't have to worry about all the various permutations of assisted transport.
Nice to see that they call out the exceptions to their exclusion so they can still cover Roombas and lawn mowers.
Nice to see that they call out the exceptions to their exclusion so they can still cover Roombas and lawn mowers.
TomD
Well-Known Member
It appears motorized land conveyance is not defined. I assumed it was a reference to "conveyance" (transport) on "motorized land" but after looking at this judgement it seems to refer to "motorized" vehicles that provide "conveyance" (transport) on "land" (as opposed to water, air, etc.):
Going back to the adjuster's reply:
After re-reading this, it seems their issue is not simply throttle. They seem to be saying it's a motorized land conveyance because it is equipped with a motor that can be used to exclusively propel the bicycle. Under the same logic walk mode would make a class 1 ebike a motorized land conveyance.
I would counter that bike is deemed to be a non-motorized vehicle (under state law) and furthermore that you can propel it without motor assistance (does not rely solely or exclusively on assistance of the motor or throttle).
Going back to the adjuster's reply:
After re-reading this, it seems their issue is not simply throttle. They seem to be saying it's a motorized land conveyance because it is equipped with a motor that can be used to exclusively propel the bicycle. Under the same logic walk mode would make a class 1 ebike a motorized land conveyance.
I would counter that bike is deemed to be a non-motorized vehicle (under state law) and furthermore that you can propel it without motor assistance (does not rely solely or exclusively on assistance of the motor or throttle).
Last edited:
Similar threads
