On 1 May 97, Bill Hider <email@example.com> wrote:
> Paul van der Eijk wrote:
> > My tower was damaged by a truck delivering gravel (one guy and
> > 2m antenna in the top.) Their insurance wants to prorate the years I
> > owned the tower over the useful live of the installation. I'm not sure that
> > this is acceptable, but if I have to make the choice, what would be the
> > useful live of the installation?
> What they are doing is "depreciating" your installation. This is a
> typical insurance procedure and is quite logical. You have already used
> the portion the useful life prior to the accident and the company who
> caused your installation to fail is responsible only for that portion of
> the useful life AFTER the accident. At the end of the useful life you
> will have to pay for improvements to extend the useful life. The
> accident causer is not responsible for this either. That's the logic.
Bill - It doesn't sound right to me. My homeowners insurance is for
replacement value, not depreciated value, in case of loss.
If someone busts something of mine, I want it replaced the way it
Barry Kutner, W2UP Internet: firstname.lastname@example.org
Newtown, PA FRC alternate: email@example.com
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com