BinaryBob
Moderator Emeritus
After reading several comments here, I was curious and looked up this issue on other web forums.
There?s a very common lament among pet owners, trying to find ?pet friendly? private RV parks and campgrounds. It is a widely held belief that these pet restrictions are the result of ?insurance company liability requirements.? This is generally not true.
Owners and management of all types of business often impose their own restrictions under the guise of ?insurance company requirements? presumably to take the heat off and avoid argument.
Ever try using a bank drive up teller on a bicycle or as a pedestrian? They won?t allow it due to their ?insurance company.?
Ever see the sign at your repair shop, ?insurance company regulations prevent you from entering the shop area.?
The list is endless and most all are fabrications.
As a risk manager for over 30 years, I checked with some of my agent/brokers who work in this area. A typical application for underwriting consideration involves asking the RV park OWNERS if they have dogs, and if so, what breeds.
They have never heard of a coverage limitation endorsement regarding pets of guests.
With that said, there may be rare exceptions for some RV parks due to frequent loss history of pet bites which necessitate some sort of control policy as an underwriting requirement. Regardless, my contacts have never heard of a ?pet bite? exclusion becoming part of the policy negating coverage, much less certain breeds being singled out. Claims in this area are relatively rare.
Similar to the above examples, it?s less confrontational for an park owner to say, ?it?s my insurance company rule? rather than, ?it?s MY rule.?
There?s a very common lament among pet owners, trying to find ?pet friendly? private RV parks and campgrounds. It is a widely held belief that these pet restrictions are the result of ?insurance company liability requirements.? This is generally not true.
Owners and management of all types of business often impose their own restrictions under the guise of ?insurance company requirements? presumably to take the heat off and avoid argument.
Ever try using a bank drive up teller on a bicycle or as a pedestrian? They won?t allow it due to their ?insurance company.?
Ever see the sign at your repair shop, ?insurance company regulations prevent you from entering the shop area.?
The list is endless and most all are fabrications.
As a risk manager for over 30 years, I checked with some of my agent/brokers who work in this area. A typical application for underwriting consideration involves asking the RV park OWNERS if they have dogs, and if so, what breeds.
They have never heard of a coverage limitation endorsement regarding pets of guests.
With that said, there may be rare exceptions for some RV parks due to frequent loss history of pet bites which necessitate some sort of control policy as an underwriting requirement. Regardless, my contacts have never heard of a ?pet bite? exclusion becoming part of the policy negating coverage, much less certain breeds being singled out. Claims in this area are relatively rare.
Similar to the above examples, it?s less confrontational for an park owner to say, ?it?s my insurance company rule? rather than, ?it?s MY rule.?