Why is a physical damage claim not an acceptable answer for S2019 #3? This skateboarding example seems like a logical answer and is what I initially thought of for when SPF9 would not provide coverage when the TNC driver is logged into the app. For some reason they specifically have it as unacceptable, is that just because the text specifically references street-hailed passengers and cargo?
I assume you are referring to part b. of S2019 #3. The question states: "Briefly describe two situations where an S.P.F. No. 9 policy purchased by a Transportation Network Company would not provide any coverage to a driver logged into the Transportation Network."
I think the keyword here is "any". Although it does not provide physical damage coverage, TPL and AB coverage is still provided.
Comments
1) No physical damage from either
2) Skater is at fault
Why is a physical damage claim not an acceptable answer for S2019 #3? This skateboarding example seems like a logical answer and is what I initially thought of for when SPF9 would not provide coverage when the TNC driver is logged into the app. For some reason they specifically have it as unacceptable, is that just because the text specifically references street-hailed passengers and cargo?
I assume you are referring to part b. of S2019 #3. The question states: "Briefly describe two situations where an S.P.F. No. 9 policy purchased by a Transportation Network Company would not provide any coverage to a driver logged into the Transportation Network."
I think the keyword here is "any". Although it does not provide physical damage coverage, TPL and AB coverage is still provided.