Question 1 of 20
Walk through the coverage analysis when a permissive employee causes third-party property damage while driving the employer’s delivery van, and the business purchased liability but no physical-damage coverage?
Strong Interview Answer
I would separate third-party liability from first-party damage to the employer’s van. I would confirm the van is a covered auto for liability, that the employee qualifies as an insured/permissive user under the form, and that the accident falls within the liability grant and limits. The absence of collision/comprehensive matters only to damage to the business’s own van; it does not by itself eliminate covered liability for the customer’s SUV.
What to Listen For
- separates third-party liability from first-party physical damage
- checks covered-auto status
- checks insured/permissive-use status
- does not treat lack of physical damage as lack of liability coverage
Caution
A strong answer should explain the analysis, not simply name 'business auto liability'.