Opinion ID: 1997757
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: State Farm's Exclusion Consistent Above Minimum

Text: State Farm also asserts that the carrying persons for a charge exclusion is consistent with the requirements of the statute. In support of that assertion, State Farm relies upon the Court's decision in Universal Underwriters Ins. Co. v. The Travelers Ins. Co., Del.Supr., 669 A.2d 45 (1995). At issue in Universal was a business exclusion. In Universal, this Court held: The automobile business exclusion ... constitutes a separate risk category. An insurer has a legitimate concern in protecting itself from greater hazards involved in the conduct of an automobile business.... We agree with that justification for the use of the exclusion in liability coverage issued to private individuals. We are of the view that the automobile business exclusion is not contrary to the public policy which underlies the state-mandated insurance program.... Private vehicle owners, ... who turn their vehicles over to a business for service or other uses benefitting the business owner should not bear the responsibility of protecting the public from a business use of the vehicle. Universal Underwriters Ins. Co. v. The Travelers Ins. Co., 669 A.2d at 48-49 (citations omitted). State Farm argues that the carrying persons for a charge exclusion, like the business exclusion in Universal, is included in standard automobile liability and no-fault policies because the activity sought to be excluded constitutes a separate risk category. See Universal Underwriters Ins. Co. v. The Travelers Ins. Co., 669 A.2d at 48. The risks associated with carrying passengers for a fee are undoubtedly greater than those normally contemplated by an insurance carrier in issuing liability and no-fault insurance to a private individual. Id. Accordingly, we assume arguendo that, above the minimum coverage, the carrying persons for a charge exclusion is not contrary to the public policy which underlies the state-mandated insurance program. Id. State Farm argues that its carrying persons for charge exclusion may be used to deny payment of the statutory minimum amounts of liability and no-fault coverages. See Universal Underwriters Ins. Co. v. The Travelers Ins. Co., 669 A.2d at 48-49. That conclusion does not follow from this Court's holding in Universal. In Universal, the Travelers conceded its obligation to provide coverage up to the statutory minimum. Id. at 48. Consequently, in Universal, this Court only held that the business exclusion would be enforceable for amounts in excess of the mandatory minimum amounts of liability and no-fault insurance.