PDA

View Full Version : Denied homeowners insurance because of "assault weapons"


tiki
12-11-2012, 1:53 PM
This may not be in the right forum, so if it isn't, i'm sorry.
I'm in the process of purchasing a home and the insurance agent said that the application asks if I own any "assault weapons". I said yes and he said that may be a problem. He called back after checking and told me that the company denied me because of the assault weapons.
Well, screw them, I went with another company, but, what a bunch of crap.


Edit: He said I could itemize the firearms and submit that under an appeal but I told him to forget it. I'm not itemizing anything and i'm not asking anyone for permission. I'll spend my money somewhere else.

Scotty
12-11-2012, 1:55 PM
AAA doesn't ask what you have, just that they don't cover any firearms you use for work.

robcoe
12-11-2012, 1:56 PM
Are yours Regestered Assault Weapons? or just guns that look similar.

Example, I owned an AR15, and I would have answered that question NO because it had a BB and was therefore not an Assault Weapon.

jrock
12-11-2012, 2:01 PM
^^^Exactly.

taperxz
12-11-2012, 2:06 PM
I would go back to them for fun and ask them to define what an AW is.

Bill Carson
12-11-2012, 2:08 PM
This may not be in the right forum, so if it isn't, i'm sorry.
I'm in the process of purchasing a home and the insurance agent said that the application asks if I own any "assault weapons". I said yes and he said that may be a problem. He called back after checking and told me that the company denied me because of the assault weapons.
Well, screw them, I went with another company, but, what a bunch of crap.


Edit: He said I could itemize the firearms and submit that under an appeal but I told him to forget it. I'm not itemizing anything and i'm not asking anyone for permission. I'll spend my money somewhere else.

What company?

nrvnqsrxk
12-11-2012, 2:10 PM
Why did you answer yes?

winnre
12-11-2012, 2:11 PM
My insurance company was worried about my dogs and stairs. When I mentioned guns they said I'd need a rider for them is all.

defcon
12-11-2012, 2:12 PM
I would go back to them for fun and ask them to define what an AW is.

theyll say "ya know its like the ones in the movies"

kcjr1125
12-11-2012, 2:15 PM
Are yours Regestered Assault Weapons? or just guns that look similar.

Example, I owned an AR15, and I would have answered that question NO because it had a BB and was therefore not an Assault Weapon.

THIS. unless its a RAW you dont own a assualt weapon just cool looking SA sporting rifle. i would still ask them to define that. Check your contract with your new insurance agency to make sure its not listed in the fine print or that you have to notify them if any "assault weapons" exist in the home.

bwiese
12-11-2012, 2:20 PM
Yup.

The state definition is what controls. If you don't have RAWs...
- you're either in violation of state law and your post isn't your biggest issue
- or you don't have aassault weapons.

warbird
12-11-2012, 2:31 PM
insurance company routinely exclude anything they think might increase the chances of a break in like any collections and firearms unless you want to pay extra to cover them. It is best to ask first if you are required to have separate riders (paying extra) for those items or can have them included in the regular policy if certain conditions are met like house alarm, safe, etc. many companies do not point it out until you file a claim and then back on page 1003 in small print you find the exclusions listed and they almost always cover collection and firearms. Better to know now than after a burglary.

morfeeis
12-11-2012, 2:32 PM
Are yours Regestered Assault Weapons? or just guns that look similar.

Example, I owned an AR15, and I would have answered that question NO because it had a BB and was therefore not an Assault Weapon.

^^^Exactly.
^^^Exactly x2

I would go back to them for fun and ask them to define what an AW is.

Do it via email so we can all read it......

Overbear
12-11-2012, 2:46 PM
Mine asked the same thing, also about breeds of dogs, and such. I just put N/A under all of it. My agent asked me why I said "because its not germane to the issuance of the homeowners policy"...they let it go and issued it.

CEDaytonaRydr
12-11-2012, 2:51 PM
This may not be in the right forum, so if it isn't, i'm sorry.
I'm in the process of purchasing a home and the insurance agent said that the application asks if I own any "assault weapons". I said yes and he said that may be a problem. He called back after checking and told me that the company denied me because of the assault weapons.
Well, screw them, I went with another company, but, what a bunch of crap.


Edit: He said I could itemize the firearms and submit that under an appeal but I told him to forget it. I'm not itemizing anything and i'm not asking anyone for permission. I'll spend my money somewhere else.

Are you (or were you) in the Military, or were your Parents? If so, give USAA a call. They're not always the cheapest but they are used to hearing about guns. They're based in Texas, so... :o

tiki
12-11-2012, 3:05 PM
Are yours Regestered Assault Weapons? or just guns that look similar.

Example, I owned an AR15, and I would have answered that question NO because it had a BB and was therefore not an Assault Weapon.

That's fine. It may work out for you, but I have heard my fair share of people having claim issues for stupid things and, having to fight it out with a national insurance company over their definition of an assault weapon vs. the state's definition isn't a fight I would want to get into. The house i'm buying isn't in California so the bullet button doesn't apply on this one.

What company?

United Property and Casualty

Why did you answer yes?

Because if I ever have a claim I don't want to have to fight with the insurance company over semantics.


The state definition is what controls. If you don't have RAWs...
- you're either in violation of state law and your post isn't your biggest issue
- or you don't have aassault weapons.


Bill, I know you know your stuff. But, I don't know if I would risk arguing with an insurance company that a firearm that is considered an assault weapon in 49 states is somehow not an assault weapon in California because of a bullet button. I know what California law is and so does everyone else on this board, but, convincing an adjuster from a company based in Connecticut that an AR-15 or an AK-47 is not an assault weapon would be a bit of work. I could always just have them ask the DOJ for clarification if the question came up though. I just don't see the insurance company getting one of those Sacramento Police flyers and saying "oh, ok, no problem". I think if they have any means to deny or delay a claim, they would take it.

I moved out of California almost a year ago so these firearms are not in California.

yellowfin
12-11-2012, 3:09 PM
Why did you answer yes?If I had to guess, because it's actually a crime of fraud to lie on an insurance application. Whether you file a claim or not, or even if you get the coverage or not, it's a misstatement on a legal document with financial and contractual implications. Now of course you can answer no and then later say that the term is undefined and altogether fictional in its premise and thus unenforceable as a term of contract, in the event of such matter arising.

tiki
12-11-2012, 3:10 PM
Are you (or were you) in the Military, or were your Parents? If so, give USAA a call. They're not always the cheapest but they are used to hearing about guns. They're based in Texas, so... :o

I wasn't but a parent was. I'm ok, there were 4 quotes and I went with one of the other ones. It took me one extra phone call to pick another company. Screw them.

taperxz
12-11-2012, 3:13 PM
That's fine. It may work out for you, but I have heard my fair share of people having claim issues for stupid things and, having to fight it out with a national insurance company over their definition of an assault weapon vs. the state's definition isn't a fight I would want to get into. The house i'm buying isn't in California so the bullet button doesn't apply on this one.



United Property and Casualty



Because if I ever have a claim I don't want to have to fight with the insurance company over semantics.





Please tell me you are not buying on Uranus. You know, you should control your own destiny there. (looking at your location):rofl:

tiki
12-11-2012, 3:13 PM
If I had to guess, because it's actually a crime of fraud to lie on an insurance application.

Yeah, I agree. It's not worth the risk or hassle. I've been around long enough to have seen and experienced how this crap winds up going if you play games like that. I'm well into my career and established financially so I don't take any risks. I cover my *** with insurance and do everything legal.

tiki
12-11-2012, 3:15 PM
you should control your own destiny there.

Yes, I do. :)

Nice one though.

Reminds me of the time I made a $100 donation to the Sacramento County CCW effort and sent Gene H. a pm that said "donation from Uranus!".
Ha ha ha.

aermotor
12-11-2012, 3:44 PM
the insurance agent said that the application asks if I own any "assault weapons". I said yes

:facepalm:

bohoki
12-11-2012, 3:51 PM
kinda reminds me of when winston says "if someone asks if you are a god, you say yes"
but just the opposite

hmm is a 50 bmg an assault weapon

i guess it would be best to ask what it an assault weapon get their legal definition

five.five-six
12-11-2012, 3:55 PM
boating accident

yellowfin
12-11-2012, 4:09 PM
This may not be in the right forum, so if it isn't, i'm sorry.
I'm in the process of purchasing a home and the insurance agent said that the application asks if I own any "assault weapons". I said yes and he said that may be a problem.

Did you see the application to see if in fact it did ask that, and fill out that question yourself, or did you just take their word for it and answered the agent and not the application? BIG DIFFERENCE. There's nothing to say an agent can't ask questions they THINK MIGHT be on there versus one that actually is. I would get a different insurance agent and recommend everyone else you know do the same. They should be looking out for your interests instead of pushing that kind of garbage, and NEVER have someone fill out something for you.

jimx
12-11-2012, 4:13 PM
If I had to guess, because it's actually a crime of fraud to lie on an insurance application. Whether you file a claim or not, or even if you get the coverage or not, it's a misstatement on a legal document with financial and contractual implications. Now of course you can answer no and then later say that the term is undefined and altogether fictional in its premise and thus unenforceable as a term of contract, in the event of such matter arising.

Well he did lie when he said he had AW.

term is undefined

???????????????????????????????????????
It is defined in the laws exactly what a AW is!

tiki
12-11-2012, 4:38 PM
Did you see the application to see if in fact it did ask that, and fill out that question yourself, or did you just take their word for it and answered the agent and not the application? BIG DIFFERENCE. There's nothing to say an agent can't ask questions they THINK MIGHT be on there versus one that actually is. I would get a different insurance agent and recommend everyone else you know do the same. They should be looking out for your interests instead of pushing that kind of garbage, and NEVER have someone fill out something for you.

No, I didn't, but I have existing home policies with them and an auto policy and a good relationship. He had several quotes and that one was the best price so I picked it. He knows I have firearms because we wrote a rider for them on the current house I live in. He asked because he wasn't sure. I don't have a problem with him. He said they asked that question on the app so I answered. It was no big deal because I just picked another company. In the future, i'll just not answer the question and go to the next company.

I just posted this because I thought people should know about these things when they crop up. Like I said earlier, no big deal for me. I got another company with all the coverage that I needed. It just took an extra call from the agent and 3 minutes to pick company #2.

Barbarossa
12-11-2012, 4:53 PM
I have state farm.

I called my agent and told him I wanted a rider on my policy for firearms.

He asked how much, and I gave him a value.

No problemo.

jonzer77
12-11-2012, 4:54 PM
Are you (or were you) in the Military, or were your Parents? If so, give USAA a call. They're not always the cheapest but they are used to hearing about guns. They're based in Texas, so... :o

When I got valuable property insurance to cover the guns my renters wouldn't, the lady on the phone started telling me about the new AR15 her husband bought her lol. USAA is awesome and is usually the cheapest from what I have found.

bwiese
12-11-2012, 4:56 PM
[QUOTE=tiki;9897463] But, I don't know if I would risk arguing with an insurance company that a firearm that is considered an assault weapon in 49 states is somehow not an assault weapon in California because of a bullet button. I know what California law is and so does everyone else on this board, but, convincing an adjuster from a company based in Connecticut that an AR-15 or an AK-47 is not an assault weapon would be a bit of work.[QUOTE]

Had no idea this was non-CA from orig. post.

By Federal law, these are not defined as assault weapons because of the 2004 AWB sunset.

hermosabeach
12-11-2012, 5:05 PM
Tiki

What is the company that asked about AW?

Munk
12-11-2012, 5:08 PM
If I had to guess, because it's actually a crime of fraud to lie on an insurance application. Whether you file a claim or not, or even if you get the coverage or not, it's a misstatement on a legal document with financial and contractual implications. Now of course you can answer no and then later say that the term is undefined and altogether fictional in its premise and thus unenforceable as a term of contract, in the event of such matter arising.

Well he did lie when he said he had AW.



???????????????????????????????????????
It is defined in the laws exactly what a AW is!

In a contract, if you plan to use a specific term, the term needs to have a common definition that is well established and known, or it must be a term defined in law (and preferably referenced for clarity), or the term must be defined in a section of the contract.

"Assault Weapon" is a fictional term, so it has no common definition. Within CA it has a definition that is quite clearly defined by law; outside of CA, you'd have to dig through your state's gun laws to see if they define the term or you'd have to rely on the now dead federal term (which you can argue doesn't apply because it's gone.)

If the insurance company wants to use that as such a significant qualifying factor, then they need to offer a definition of what the company would define as an assault weapon so that you may know whether to characterize your firearms as such when answering the question in order to be as truthful as possible.

mud99
12-11-2012, 5:34 PM
I don't know where you tried to get homeowners insurance from, but I can assure you that State Farm is willing to insure almost any weird or dangerous item.

I have a separate firearms rider on my policy, but I also listed out lots of specific items for them should I have a claim, which included 49.9 pounds of gunpowder, 20000 primers, a 55 gallon barrel of diesel, and "tannerite"

The only thing they were concerned with was my pool ( they recommended I get rid of the broken diving board) and my shake roof.

Steve1968LS2
12-11-2012, 5:49 PM
"assault weapon" is a fantasy term for items none of us have.. even in the bastardized way few of us own them. A bullet buttoned AR type rifle is NOT an "assault weapon".. so I would have said no..

My insurance company gave me a rider to cover all my guns..

Is denying coverage even legal?

jdberger
12-11-2012, 6:59 PM
In a contract, if you plan to use a specific term, the term needs to have a common definition that is well established and known, or it must be a term defined in law (and preferably referenced for clarity), or the term must be defined in a section of the contract.

"Assault Weapon" is a fictional term, so it has no common definition. Within CA it has a definition that is quite clearly defined by law; outside of CA, you'd have to dig through your state's gun laws to see if they define the term or you'd have to rely on the now dead federal term (which you can argue doesn't apply because it's gone.)

If the insurance company wants to use that as such a significant qualifying factor, then they need to offer a definition of what the company would define as an assault weapon so that you may know whether to characterize your firearms as such when answering the question in order to be as truthful as possible.

Bingo

dieselpower
12-11-2012, 7:33 PM
Well he did lie when he said he had AW.



???????????????????????????????????????
It is defined in the laws exactly what a AW is!

This isnt CA, so unless the State he was getting the quote in has a definition of AW, then he should have said, "No." NY, NJ, CA, IL, HI and RI have defined AW laws.


Had no idea this was non-CA from orig. post.

By Federal law, these are not defined as assault weapons because of the 2004 AWB sunset.

That's why he shouldn't have even brought it up. The answer should be No every time someone asks this question.

Bingo

+1

stix213
12-11-2012, 7:52 PM
Bill, I know you know your stuff. But, I don't know if I would risk arguing with an insurance company that a firearm that is considered an assault weapon in 49 states is somehow not an assault weapon in California because of a bullet button. I know what California law is and so does everyone else on this board, but, convincing an adjuster from a company based in Connecticut that an AR-15 or an AK-47 is not an assault weapon would be a bit of work. I could always just have them ask the DOJ for clarification if the question came up though. I just don't see the insurance company getting one of those Sacramento Police flyers and saying "oh, ok, no problem". I think if they have any means to deny or delay a claim, they would take it.

I moved out of California almost a year ago so these firearms are not in California.

There isn't an AWB in 49 states, so how could 49 states even have a definition of what an "assault weapon" is? "Assault Weapon" is an arbitrary legislative definition for a firearm of certain specific makes/models, or certain arbitrary feature combinations that state alone wants to define as an AW, and all those makes/models and feature lists are completely different depending on the state's specific ban. There is no federal definition, so no definition to go by in a state without an AW ban.

For example, a ruger 10/22 with a collapsible stock is not an AW here, but is in New York City. A semi-auto centerfire rifle with a detachable magazine and a pistol grip is not an AW in NY, while it is here. If you're in a state that doesn't even have an AW ban, then you by definition can't possibly even have an AW.

So who's definition are you following?

madjack956
12-11-2012, 9:08 PM
My insurance company rep. asked me if I owned a trampoline. No kidding.. I asked why, has there been a rash of trampoline claims. She said yes. The agent knows I have firearms, but she was more concerned about a trampoline.
Go figure.

robcoe
12-12-2012, 6:33 AM
That's fine. It may work out for you, but I have heard my fair share of people having claim issues for stupid things and, having to fight it out with a national insurance company over their definition of an assault weapon vs. the state's definition isn't a fight I would want to get into. The house i'm buying isn't in California so the bullet button doesn't apply on this one.



United Property and Casualty



Because if I ever have a claim I don't want to have to fight with the insurance company over semantics.



Bill, I know you know your stuff. But, I don't know if I would risk arguing with an insurance company that a firearm that is considered an assault weapon in 49 states is somehow not an assault weapon in California because of a bullet button. I know what California law is and so does everyone else on this board, but, convincing an adjuster from a company based in Connecticut that an AR-15 or an AK-47 is not an assault weapon would be a bit of work. I could always just have them ask the DOJ for clarification if the question came up though. I just don't see the insurance company getting one of those Sacramento Police flyers and saying "oh, ok, no problem". I think if they have any means to deny or delay a claim, they would take it.

I moved out of California almost a year ago so these firearms are not in California.

Since there is no national definition of AW, and the property is not in California, knowing where it is would help. Also if they are using their definition of assault weapon(in which case Yes or No should be clear) knowing what that is would help. Barring those pieces of information the only advice anyone here can offer is based on Federal and California law, and since there is no Federal definition of assault weapon(and most states don't have one either), all we can give you is information based on California law.

dieselpower
12-12-2012, 6:47 AM
I'll toss in another point of reason...

When an Ins co asks, "Do you own any Dog?", Do you reply, "Yes" when you own a cat?

How about when a Ins Co asks about smoking tobacco. Do you answer "Yes, I smoke marijuana some times. I have a legal script from a Doctor"

This wasn't the question asked.

Police Officer- "Do you have any illegal drugs or illegal weapons in the car?"
You- "Yes, I have NyQuil in my bathroom cabinet and I own several guns that are locked in my safe at home."

Do you own any Assault Weapons? Unless you registered a firearm as an AW with the State or Federal Government, have a SOT, or NFA on file the answer is "No". and say no more.

Since a machine gun isnt a AW, since no one ever linked those two terms together, if I had a NFA full auto firearm, I would still answer, "No", and leave it at that.

kablooie
12-12-2012, 8:48 AM
i work for an insurance company... you dont want to "misrepresent" ANY information on an application. especially if ur doing so with an intent to GET coverage. one item of MATERIAL misrepresentation either in the application or claim process will screw you.

also, re riders/endorsements: you "usually" have sufficient coverage for anything other than theft. with my company, our policies limit the amount we pay per item and per claim for theft claims....

the one thing i hate more than anything is telling someone i can only pay them X amount of dollars, which can be far less than what their damages are costing. if you think you have a good amount of money invested in your firearms, check w/ your agent about the LIMIT of coverage you have (for specific perils) and if you think you should increase it. when the time comes for a claim, dont be pissed at the insurance company b/c you didnt do your due diligence. i would even say that goes for anything you think is of high value in your home (computers, art, etc).

my 2 cents.

tiki
12-12-2012, 9:37 AM
Tiki

What is the company that asked about AW?

Mentioned in an earlier post.

donw
12-12-2012, 9:43 AM
Are you (or were you) in the Military, or were your Parents? If so, give USAA a call. They're not always the cheapest but they are used to hearing about guns. They're based in Texas, so... :o

i have both HO and auto thru USAA...good company

IMO, you should call the Calif state insurance commissioner and see what gives...

paul0660
12-12-2012, 9:46 AM
you dont want to "misrepresent" ANY information on an application. especially if ur doing so with an intent to GET coverage. one item of MATERIAL misrepresentation either in the application or claim process will screw you.

True dat. Ins companies are in the business of collecting premiums, not paying claims.

tiki
12-12-2012, 10:09 AM
i work for an insurance company... you dont want to "misrepresent" ANY information on an application. especially if ur doing so with an intent to GET coverage. one item of MATERIAL misrepresentation either in the application or claim process will screw you.


Exactly. That's why I answered 'yes', and would do so in the future again.

rsrocket1
12-12-2012, 10:26 AM
This may not be in the right forum, so if it isn't, i'm sorry.
This might be the right forum but it was titled and phrased in a way to raise blood pressures


Well, screw them, I went with another company, but, what a bunch of crap.


...and in a later post:

I have existing home policies with them and an auto policy and a good relationship.
"screw them"?
Hmmm.....


I just posted this because I thought people should know about these things when they crop up.

WINNER!

This should have been the Original Post!

xrMike
12-12-2012, 10:57 AM
Are yours Regestered Assault Weapons? or just guns that look similar.

Example, I owned an AR15, and I would have answered that question NO because it had a BB and was therefore not an Assault Weapon.

"assault weapon" is a fantasy term for items none of us have.. even in the bastardized way few of us own them. A bullet buttoned AR type rifle is NOT an "assault weapon".. so I would have said no..

Technically, even RAWs (without BBs) are not true "Assault Weapons", since they are semi-auto versions of the real thing, correct?

(I know that governments and tHE mEDIA have bastardized the original and true definition of the term)

Write Winger
12-12-2012, 11:25 AM
Would it be too much for any of us to ask an insurance broker "please define assault weapon"?

I'd love to know the answer, non CA of course.

socal2310
12-12-2012, 11:28 AM
Technically, even RAWs (without BBs) are not true "Assault Weapons", since they are semi-auto versions of the real thing, correct?

(I know that governments and tHE mEDIA have bastardized the original and true definition of the term)

No, you're confusing "assault rifles" which have a commonly agreed upon definition: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle

and "assault weapons" which are defined legislatively as in the now expired Federal AWB or at the state level (no two of which are identical).

Ryan

wash
12-12-2012, 11:43 AM
This is stupid. My first guess is that the insurance company doesn't want an armed response when they screw you out of a legitimate claim.

Going back to your answer of the question, you shouldn't answer yes unless you own registered "assault weapons" and it doesn't matter what California considers an "assault weapon" if you aren't actually in California because as Bill said, there is no such thing as an "assault weapon" on a federal level, the only laws left are state laws and a California compliant OLL firearm is NOT an "assault weapon".

I will be careful to remember the name of that insurance company and avoid it in the future.

wash
12-12-2012, 11:43 AM
This is stupid. My first guess is that the insurance company doesn't want an armed response when they screw you out of a legitimate claim.

Going back to your answer of the question, you shouldn't answer yes unless you own registered "assault weapons" and it doesn't matter what California considers an "assault weapon" if you aren't actually in California because as Bill said, there is no such thing as an "assault weapon" on a federal level, the only laws left are state laws and a California compliant OLL firearm is NOT an "assault weapon".

I will be careful to remember the name of that insurance company and avoid it in the future.

Nick Justice
12-12-2012, 12:02 PM
My company's agent (One word rhymes with "barm") said "You have some nice guns." and wrote my policy. No serial numbers or any other info required.

tiki
12-12-2012, 1:49 PM
...and in a later post:


"screw them"?
Hmmm.....



I have purchased policies from other companies through the insurance agent. So, I don't have an issue with the people in the office where I go to get my insurance, just one company that provided a quote.

thayne
12-12-2012, 4:01 PM
I wouldnt do business with an insurance company that asked whether I had them or not

paul0660
12-12-2012, 4:08 PM
My company's agent (One word rhymes with "barm") said "You have some nice guns." and wrote my policy. No serial numbers or any other info required.

The agent got into your house?

I have nothing but bafflement at that. I have had a few houses and a few companies and agents. No one wanted to see other than that I had a tree through the roof previously, and certainly extant.

GWbiker
12-12-2012, 4:41 PM
I once heard a politician describe an Assault Weapon as a rifle with a "thingie on the front that goes up".


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

lilro
12-12-2012, 5:10 PM
I would've said no, but in hindsight it is good you said yes. You found another place, and now we all know which insurance company to avoid.

Wherryj
12-13-2012, 11:24 AM
My insurance company was worried about my dogs and stairs. When I mentioned guns they said I'd need a rider for them is all.

Does your home have assault stairs?

savannah
12-13-2012, 11:42 AM
USAA covers guns up to $10,000.00 under your homeowners insurance starting next year. If you own more than that, then a rider is needed. They don't ask what you own, only the value.