QUESTION:
We are having a number of conversations relating to public liability and how it would respond to fork lifts and reach trucks when they do not have loads on the forks.
One point of view is that if there is nothing on the forks then the item is not being used as a "tool". Therefore the vehicle’s exclusion of the public liability policy would apply. This means that unless the item is insured on a motor policy there would be no liability cover.
The other argument is that, at some stage, the forklift has to be empty during the process, so how can it be classed as not being used as "tool"? Therefore the liability policy responds and the item is insured on the MD cover.
Are there any legal or claims precedents anyone is aware of that could help with how best to cover the liability aspect?
CROSSLEY GATES REPLIES:
The cover for mobile mechanical plant usually expressly provides cover for both loading and unloading and for the bringing to or removal of a load, and for the use of the vehicle as mobile mechanical plant generally.
Therefore, so long as it isn't being used for some purpose unrelated to these (such as merely transporting a person from A to B which has nothing to do with what it is designed for) the cover under the PL Policy should apply, I suggest.
I am not aware of any cases about the application of this extension, but I agree it can be troublesome.
