Insurance considerations overweight

Log in

Log In | Register

Skip to main content

Topic: Insurance considerations overweight (Read 717 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Insurance considerations overweight

October 06, 2016, 09:57:59 am

We are seriously looking to move up to a 31' unit to gain the extra space but in reviewing posts here I read "I have almost never seen a 31' LD that was not overloaded" by someone who sees a lot of rigs and knows what he is talking about. I understand folks choose consciously to roll the dice or are simply ignorant of weight considerations, but in this situation (travel over GVWR) could there be insurance issues in the case of an accident? Legal issues (negligence)?

The Ford E450 doesn't seem to have enough CCC for a 31' RV. My discussion is general and not specific to LD.

(As an aside, ALL of the sales reps we have encountered at Hershey and a half dozen dealerships KNOW NOTHING ABOUT WEIGHT ISSUES with regard to the RVs they sell.)

Thanks to this group, I am not ignorant on the subject!

Todd

Re: Insurance considerations overweight

Reply #1 – October 06, 2016, 10:31:54 am

Let's assume that you cause an accident that results in injury to a third party since that is where the money is as far as claims go. In that event a personal injury attorney depending on how good he/she is might care about it if there is enough money at stake. Experts would have to be hired to opine on what effect, if any, the weight had on the severity of the accident. They would also have to know how much the RV weighed at the time of the accident which might not be all that easy following something causing serious damage.

That said, while the GVWR might be exceeded it is a lot less likely that the GCVWR is being exceeded unless you are towing something extremely heavy. In our case we have been full timing in our 31' for 8 years as of today, in fact. I have weighed both the rig and towed several times and we are always close and sometimes slightly over for the LD itself. The towed weighs in just under 3,800 pounds. We are generally 2,000 pounds or more under the GCVWR and based on that I don't think it increases your risk relative to a negligence claim. Based on that I don't think it increases your risk if you are overweight for the LD itself since it would be hard to exceed 20,000 pounds in the LD alone.

While you can never say never I don't believe you have to worry about an increased liability exposure.

As far as first party claims which are collision, comprehensive and medical claims I don't see any concern that an insurer would deny coverage to a policyholder based on excess weight. There is no language in the policy that I am aware of that would deny or exclude coverage based on that.

Jim

Re: Insurance considerations overweight

Reply #2 – October 06, 2016, 10:55:43 am

I should add that I am assuming that you have a supplemental braking system as required if you are towing.

I should also add this. If you cause an accident and are 100% at fault then you have bought the results. Some states due award punitive damages for egregious acts of negligence. If the injuries are that severe and possibly expensive and if there are significant assets to go after they will be looking for anything and everything and will allege anything so why worry. In addition to worrying about your weight you can worry about driving too fast, following too closely, running a red light or stop sign, going over the center line and the list goes on.

Don't get me wrong, I think it is reasonable to consider this and would be irresponsible not to think about it. I would want to weigh any SOB I was thinking of before purchase just to know what I'm really getting.

Jim

Re: Insurance considerations overweight

Reply #3 – October 06, 2016, 10:56:24 am

"We are seriously looking to move up to a 31' unit to gain the extra space but in reviewing posts here I read "I have almost never seen a 31' LD that was not overloaded" by someone who sees a lot of rigs and knows what he is talking about. "

He does NOT know what he's talking about. We owned a 26 mb then a 44 foot Tiffin and now a 2011 31TB. We have zero problems staying within the weight limit with our spacious, super comfy 31. 31 footers built after 2008 have a higher weight limit than pre-2008 models. Also, we tow a small 2500 pound car (Honda Fit) that easily carries up to 500 pounds of stuff.

Re: Insurance considerations overweight

Reply #4 – October 06, 2016, 11:04:18 am

I want to be able to travel with a full fresh water tank. I need at least 1,500 for us, dogs, food, gear, and clothing. Won't buy new unless I get 1,750. Weight is a documented item kind of like texting and driving. Read a post about someone who caused a death when his 5th wheel rolled. His truck was not rated to pull that 5th wheel. Not good. This got me aware of the issue.

Re: Insurance considerations overweight

Reply #5 – October 06, 2016, 11:15:46 am

"I want to be able to travel with a full fresh water tank"

Why? In over 100,000 miles driving an RV we never carried more than a third of a tank of water and never had a problem.
We also almost always leave camp with empty, clean black and grey tanks.

Re: Insurance considerations overweight

Reply #6 – October 06, 2016, 11:25:07 am

Why fresh water? We like to dry camp for 3 days at a time. We don't want to conserve water or take sponge bathes. We understand that we could do things differently, but we don't want to. We may have to stick with a smaller rig (27-29') due to our desire to be underloaded and able to carry water and everything else.

A 31' LD has CCC of approximately 1,316. (No jacks). You have to subtract the weight of the fresh water from the manufacturer's posted numbers ( OCCC). Tricky.

Re: Insurance considerations overweight

Reply #7 – October 06, 2016, 12:09:40 pm

In my former life, I was a traffic engineer. I have done more than a thousand accident analyses and nearly a hundred full reconstructions. Let's talk about braking ability. Assuming you have brakes of sufficient strength to bring your tires to the friction point, where they start to skid, braking distance has nothing to do with weight. As load on a tire increases, friction force increases at the same rate. Vehicle weight drops out of the equation. A full cement truck should, in theory, be able to stop in the same distance as a Ferrari. However, all is not equal. Tires with high mileage ratings manage that by using a harder rubber formulation. That means less friction. Big vehicles such as cement mixers or dump trucks usually do not have brakes strong enough to lock up the wheels, and such trucks usually use tires with a hard rubber formulation. Thus, they take longer to stop.

So, how does all that apply to us? If your brakes are strong enough to lock up your tires at the weight you are carrying on either axle, your weight has no effect on braking distance, and the vehicle weight should not be a factor in an accident. However, if the brakes cannot lock up the wheels, then it can be argued that a heavier vehicle takes longer to come to a stop, and if you were not overweight, then the accident would have been less severe or possibly avoided completely. Lawyers make lots of money on stuff like that.

Side note - towing ANYTHING that cannot manage full braking of the towed vehicle or trailer adds momentum to the vehicle without increasing friction to the tires, thus dramatically increasing braking distance.

Bottom line, if you are traveling overweight on any axle, you are taking a risk.

Ken F in NM

Re: Insurance considerations overweight

Reply #8 – October 06, 2016, 12:33:34 pm

Even if you are within the normal weight limits our RV's are bigger and much heavier than the typical automobile and the potential property and bodily injury damage is far greater. A common accident scenario is being rear ended when stopped for a traffic light. An RV has a much greater likelihood of causing a chain reaction accident thus increasing the amount of injury and damage.

This is why knowing your risk is important. Since state laws vary in regards to what assets are at risk you might want to speak with an attorney in your area to answer that question for you. That should help you decide what kind of limits you should carry and determine if you need a Personal Umbrella policy.

Your insurer has the responsibility of protecting you in the event of an at fault loss. What that means is that they should be obtaining a release of all claims in your behalf. If they fail to do that when they had the opportunity to do so they expose themselves to the greater risk of a failure to act in good faith. There are attorneys who specialize in bad faith litigation and there are no limits on the amount of that exposure to the insurer.

Jim

Re: Insurance considerations overweight

Reply #9 – October 06, 2016, 12:55:16 pm

There are ways around the water situation. For argument's sake, twelve gallons of water equals one hundred pounds. Can you put 24 gallons of drinking/cooking water in your CR-V? That's what we do, even though we have no weight problem - we just drink distilled water and use it for cooking. This would free up nearly 200 pounds of weight capacity in one of the more spacious 31-foot models.

RV'ing is a series of tradeoffs. There are many things one would wish to be able to do the same as at home (i.e. full shower), but fact is, a bird bath, done carefully, will cleanse your body sufficiently that you likely will not be a blight on society, particularly if you have not engaged in any activity that requires a full shower to become cleansed, i.e. doing major work on your engine, and all-day hike in Moab in July, etc..

I'm sure others have water conservation suggestions, but here's one that comes to mind to me. Do you flush the toilet with each use? I've observed that my husband, because he employs a urinal for medical reasons, uses very little flushing water. I know - TMI - but if you fill a urinal and then dump it when full, you may need to use almost no water to clean the bowl.

I gotta throw in with you that the 31-footer would provide a lot of comfort, and I would be more than willing to make the adjustments needed to enjoy those comforts. It takes only a bit of thought and practice to drop your water use way down. One really easy trick I have learned is to line your plate or bowl with a coffee filter (if compatible with the food you are about to consume), and then roll it up into a tiny ball and put it in a covered container for the next garbage run. This should leave your plate/bowl fairly clean, requiring a minimum of clean up.

Have you noticed at BBQ joints that they frequently serve their meals in a plastic basket with a paper liner? This saves them clean-up costs, and you could do the same. If you have something to eat that is messier than a filter can take on, you can use a piece of waxed paper, or parchment paper as the buffer.

In our younger days, we camped for three weeks at a time in two different Volkswagen campers, which had water capacities of ten gallons and no grey water collection tank. This was back in the 80's. We put a pail under the outflow and disposed of the grey water appropriately, as if we were tent camping. Our current Sportsmobile van camper has a seven-gallon grey tank to go with the same ten-gallon fresh water capacity, so we must employ strict water saving measures. I cook all meals from scratch, so water usage must be thought through thoroughly. Actions just need to be adjusted to meet the desired goal.

Please pardon my intrusion if you are already employing these water-saving techniques.

Virtual hugs,

Judie

•~•~•~•~•~•~•~•~•~•~•~•~•

Todd said:

We like to dry camp for 3 days at a time. We don't want to conserve water or take sponge bathes. We understand that we could do things differently, but we don't want to. We may have to stick with a smaller rig (27-29') due to our desire to be underloaded and able to carry water and everything else.

Re: Insurance considerations overweight

Reply #10 – October 06, 2016, 01:16:00 pm

"We like to dry camp for 3 days at a time. We don't want to conserve water or take sponge bathes. We understand that we could do things differently, but we don't want to. We may have to stick with a smaller rig (27-29') due to our desire to be underloaded and able to carry water and everything else."

Personal choice -- but I would never, ever go back to a 26 after experiencing the significantly improved creature comfort of our 31TB. YMMV but in my opinion you perceive an exaggerated "need" to travel with a full water tank.

Re: Insurance considerations overweight

Reply #11 – October 06, 2016, 01:18:30 pm

Todd, your solution seems to me to be reasonable. We are a light water users, but not into the strong water reduction measures that our kids in SoCal are used to, at home and in camp. We also camp with some folks who use a LOT of water. I think the camp environment helps form the water use ethic.

More important to me is the issue of overweight rigs, when immediate safety of self and others is at stake. A lot of informed answers here, to which I can only add personal anecdotes that reinforce my obsession with being under the weight limit.

Re: Insurance considerations overweight

Reply #12 – October 06, 2016, 01:31:27 pm

Quote from: Bob Siegel - October 06, 2016, 11:15:46 am

"I want to be able to travel with a full fresh water tank"

Why? In over 100,000 miles driving an RV we never carried more than a third of a tank of water and never had a problem.

Obviously, you don't live in earthquake country. We never travel or park the LD without a full water tank.
Also had the experience, a few times, of finding a campground without water, when it was supposed to have it available.
That can change your plans quickly.
Now if you only camp in full hookup parks, this may work...maybe.
We went to a LD Caravan Club GG, at an RV park, where a large brush fire had cut the power and no water was available to the 100+ rigs attending. The only available water was in a swimming pool. A fun four days.

If you need to travel without a full tank, to stay under the GVW, IMO, you are cutting it too close .
Running at a full load, all the time, isn't going to provide the longest chassis life or the best handling.

Larry

Re: Insurance considerations overweight

Reply #13 – October 06, 2016, 01:32:56 pm

We're approaching our 4 year anniversary this month since acquiring Bessie. The amount of time in the rig slowly increase to what will now be 4 months annually. (Joining TT is making this possible). Dry camping is very minimal so I have to rethink this weight issue in the context of suggestions regarding the need to haul full water around. With a very likely tendency to be in TT parks a lot of the time, it's an option. Minnesota SP don't have water at the site, but always at the dump station. Whatever we do, being overweight is not an option. I confess to a great deal of flip flopping with regard to new rig selection. It's such a "permanent decision" when buying new. We plan to own the rig for 15 years. Thanks to all for input.

Re: Insurance considerations overweight

Reply #14 – October 06, 2016, 02:36:47 pm

Todd, it isn't flip-flopping! Our continual discussion on this topic is about alternatives to our current rig. We enjoy the thought process of evaluating and weighing alternatives, and it helps us better appreciate and use whatever RV we are currently using.

Re: Insurance considerations overweight

Reply #15 – October 06, 2016, 05:03:34 pm

Todd, I agree it isn't flip flopping. I 'subscribe' to a few RV newsgroups on Facebook (topic for another day). The most sad thing I see is folk over or under buy a new RV. We, Liz and I, really liked the 'roominess' of a larger RV but we knew our style of 'camping' was State Parks, National Forests and other smaller campgrounds. We can 'squeeze' into smaller places then my larger brethren. I feel is best to be honest with yourself about you normally do. These 'pups' cost too much to buy one you'll not be happy with from day one.

Re: Insurance considerations overweight

Reply #16 – October 07, 2016, 10:53:40 am

Quote from: Todd - October 06, 2016, 11:25:07 am

Why fresh water? We like to dry camp for 3 days at a time.

Three days, great. We have dry camped for 90+ days more than once. We like our showers, so we need to refill the tanks every 4 to 6 days. We fill our tanks every chance we can. Weight is not much of a problem in a MB. It would be for us in a 31.

We all tend to see things as we are. To the poster that never has over a 1/3 tank, that indicates your next stop will have hookups. That's the way MOST RV's are used. We are the minority, shunning RV parks - they make us feel like we are in prison.

Julie, putting the weigh in toad does NOT help. Sure it's on another axle, but when you are going uphill the water in the toad may as well be in the rig as far as your engine and driveline are concerned. This was recently discussed in a towing post.

Re: Insurance considerations overweight

Reply #17 – October 07, 2016, 11:11:58 am

"He does NOT know what he's talking about."

Bob, it's great that you manage to stay under the weight limits with your 31-footer, but you could have found a better way of expressing it. When Larry wrote "I have almost never seen a 31' LD that was not overloaded," that was a simple statement based on his extensive personal experience--Larry has seen and worked on a lot more rigs than you or I. In short, good for you for traveling light, but you're most likely in a small minority, and Larry generally does know what he's talking about.

Affiliate Notice

LDOF is user-supported. When you purchase through some links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission at no cost to you. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.