632.32(6)(b)4.
4. Any use of the motor vehicle for unlawful purposes, or for transportation of liquor in violation of law, or while the driver is under the influence of an intoxicant or a controlled substance or controlled substance analog under
ch. 961 or a combination thereof, under the influence of any other drug to a degree which renders him or her incapable of safely driving, or under the combined influence of an intoxicant and any other drug to a degree which renders him or her incapable of safely driving, or any use of the motor vehicle in a reckless manner. In this subdivision, "drug" has the meaning specified in
s. 450.01 (10).
632.32(6)(c)
(c) No policy may limit the time for giving notice of any accident or casualty covered by the policy to less than 20 days.
632.32 Annotation
Legislative Council Note, 1979: Sub. (1) retains the scope portion of former sub. (1), but the notice provision of former sub. (1) is transferred to new s. 632.26 and broadened to apply to all liability insurance.
632.32 Annotation
Sub. (2) (b) continues former sub. (2) (a); pars. (a) and (c) are new definitions in this place, though par. (a) tracks the language of s. 344.01 (2) (b). It would be possible to sharpen up the definition of motor vehicle, though that can only be done on the basis of a policy determination of what policies should be subject to this section. The exact delimitation of the affected class of policies is of less importance than if the section were mandating insurance or purported to change rules of law.
632.32 Annotation
Sub. (4) continues former sub. (3) and former s. 632.34 (5) with major editorial changes but without intended change of meaning except to add an unidentified hit-run vehicle as an uninsured vehicle. A precise definition of hit-and-run is not necessary for in the rare case where a question arises the court can draw the line.
632.32 Annotation
Sub. (5) continues the permitted provisions of former sub. (2) (b). Par. (d) continues a sentence of former s. 632.32 (2) (b), relocated in relation to other provisions to make its application clearer.
632.32 Annotation
Sub. (5) (e) deals with a latent ambiguity in former s. 204.34, carried forward into s. 632.34, which was picked up and noticed by the Wisconsin Supreme Court in Davison v. Wilson (1975),
71 Wis. 2d 630. The court suggested (at p. 641) that the section should be the subject of a clarifying amendment. The same ambiguity was dealt with by the court in Dahm v. Employers Mutual Liability Insurance Company of Wisconsin (1976),
74 Wis. 2d 123. The resolution of the ambiguity in par. (e) is believed to represent the probable intention of the legislature in the original enactment and, in any event, to represent the sound position in public policy.
632.32 Annotation
Sub. (6) deals with prohibited provisions. Par. (a) picks up the last sentence of former sub. (2) (b) which was a prohibited rather than a required provision. Par. (b) incorporates what was formerly s. 632.34 (3) in sub. (6) (b) 1., former subs. (5) and (6) in sub. (6) (b) 2., former sub. (2) (a) in sub. (6) (b) 3 and former sub. (2) (b) and (c) in sub. (6) (b) 4. Par. (c) continues the first sentence of former s. 632.34 (4), without change.
632.32 Annotation
It escaped the attention of everyone involved in the revision, and not least the principal drafters, that former s. 632.34 (1) narrowed the coverage of old s. 204.34. That has led, in this amendment, to combining most of ss. 632.32 and 632.34 in a single section, numbered 632.32. All parts of s. 632.34 which need to be preserved are transferred to s. 632.32, with the minor exception contained in new s. 632.34. [Bill 146-S]
632.32 Note
NOTE: 1995 Wisconsin Act 21, which became effective on July 15, 1995, made significant changes in the law regarding the "stacking" of insurance policy coverage.
632.32 Annotation
A "family exclusion clause" valid in the state of policy issuance will be given effect in Wisconsin. Knight v. Heritage Mutual Insurance Co.
71 Wis. 2d 821,
239 N.W.2d 348 (1976).
632.32 Annotation
The concept of permissive use is the same regardless of whether it arises under the "any motor vehicle" coverage section of s. 344.33 (2) or the omnibuses coverage statute. Gross v. Joecks,
72 Wis. 2d 583,
241 N.W.2d 727 (1976).
632.32 Annotation
A "fellow employee" exclusion clause is only valid if the tort-feasor and injured party are employees of the named insured and employer is required to provide worker's compensation coverage. Dahm v. Employers Mutual Liability Insurance Co.
74 Wis. 2d 123,
246 N.W.2d 131 (1976).
632.32 Annotation
A spouse who was not party to the contract, reasonably believing that coverage existed after the insured spouse's death, must be given a grace period before having to comply with technical, not commonly known provisions of a policy. Handal v. American Farmers Mutual Casualty Co.
79 Wis. 2d 67,
255 N.W.2d 903 (1977).
632.32 Annotation
Generally when a permissive user of a vehicle is the real owner of the car for all practical purposes, but not the named insured, and the permissive user grants permission for a 3rd person to use the vehicle, the named insured's permission is implied. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. v. Osusky,
90 Wis. 2d 142,
279 N.W.2d 719 (Ct. App. 1979).
632.32 Annotation
Injury to a police officer who was stabbed while unloading beer cans from an automobile did not arise out of use of the automobile. Tomlin v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Insurance Co.
95 Wis. 2d 215,
290 N.W.2d 285 (1980).
632.32 Annotation
Sub. (4) (a) 2. b. does not mandate coverage for an accident involving the insured's vehicle and an unidentified motor vehicle when there was no physical contact between the vehicles. Hayne v. Progressive Northern Insurance Co.
115 Wis. 2d 68,
339 N.W.2d 588 (1983).
632.32 Annotation
Third parties may recover against an insurer even though the insured's fraudulent application voided the policy under s. 631.11. Rauch v. American Family Insurance Co.
115 Wis. 2d 257,
340 N.W.2d 478 (1983).
632.32 Annotation
Arguments that "reduction clauses" in uninsured motorist provisions were invalid and that a release did not bar subsequent a claim against the insurer for bad faith were frivolous. Radlein v. Industrial Fire & Casualty Insurance Co.
117 Wis. 2d 605,
345 N.W.2d 874 (1984).
632.32 Annotation
A "drive other car" exclusion which prohibited stacking of uninsured motorist benefits against same insurer was voided by s. 631.43. Welch v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
122 Wis. 2d 172,
361 N.W.2d 680 (1985).
632.32 Annotation
A motor vehicle operated by an insured driver was not "uninsured" under sub. (4). Hemerley v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co.
127 Wis. 2d 304,
379 N.W.2d 860 (Ct. App. 1985).
632.32 Annotation
A reducing clause in an uninsured motorist provision was voided by sub. (4) (a). Nicholson v. Home Insurance Cos.
137 Wis. 2d 581,
405 N.W.2d 327 (1987).
632.32 Annotation
Because uninsured motorist coverage is "personal and portable", the claimant was covered by a policy on a vehicle not involved in the accident. Parks v. Waffle,
138 Wis. 2d 70,
405 N.W.2d 690 (Ct. App. 1987).
632.32 Annotation
Loss of consortium is not a separate bodily injury under a policy's "each person" limitation. Landsinger v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co.
142 Wis. 2d 138,
417 N.W.2d 899 (Ct. App. 1987).
632.32 Annotation
An insurer could not avoid uninsured motorist coverage based on a policy provision excluding resident relatives who own their own car. Hulsey v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co.
142 Wis. 2d 639,
419 N.W.2d 288 (Ct. App. 1987).
632.32 Annotation
A reducing clause and "regular use" exclusionary clause violated sub. (4) (a). Niemann v. Badger Mutual Insurance Co.
143 Wis. 2d 73,
420 N.W.2d 378 (Ct. App. 1988).
632.32 Annotation
An auto insurer who pays under an uninsured motorist provision is not a tortfeasor or tortfeasor's insurer against whom an injured insured's medical insurer may assert a subrogation claim. Employers Health Insurance v. General Casualty Company of Wisconsin,
161 Wis. 2d 937,
469 N.W.2d 172 (1991).
632.32 Annotation
A policy may expand but not reduce uninsured motorist coverage. The policy not the statute determines coverage beyond the statutory requirements. Fletcher v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
165 Wis. 2d 350,
477 N.W.2d 90 (Ct. App. 1991).
632.32 Annotation
A policy cannot limit uninsured motorist coverage to occupants of vehicles. St. Paul Mercury Insurance Co. v. Zastrow,
166 Wis. 2d 423,
480 N.W.2d 8 (1992).
632.32 Annotation
If the insurer of a vehicle becomes insolvent, the vehicle is uninsured under sub. (4) (a) 2. even though an insurance guaranty association assumes the liability of the insolvent insurer. Fritsche v. Ford Motor Credit Co.
171 Wis. 2d 280,
491 N.W.2d 119 (Ct. App. 1992).
632.32 Annotation
To take advantage of sub. (5) (c), a policy must include language that either says permissive users are restricted to the minimum statutory limits of liability or that users may not avail themselves of the policy unless there is no other valid collectible insurance. Carrell v. Wolken,
173 Wis. 2d 426,
496 N.W.2d 651 (Ct. App. 1992). See also Henry v. General Casualty Co.
225 Wis. 2d 849,
593 N.W.2d 913 (Ct. App. 1999).
632.32 Annotation
A reducing clause that is unavailable to a tortfeasor and seeks to reduce uninsured motorist benefits by amounts received under worker's compensation is invalid. United Fire & Casualty Co. v. Kleppe,
174 Wis. 2d 637,
498 N.W.2d 226 (1993).
632.32 Annotation
Adult members of a named insured's household are capable of giving themselves permission to drive under sub. (5). When the named insured is a corporation and the insurer knows the vehicle is owned by a corporation employee, the owner will be treated as the named insured under sub. (5). Home Insurance Co. v. Phillips,
175 Wis. 2d 104,
499 N.W.2d 193 (Ct. App. 1993).
632.32 Annotation
When a premium has been paid for underinsured motorist coverage under which no benefits may ever be paid due to the application of policy definitions, the coverage is illusory and against public policy. Hoglund v. Secura Insurance,
176 Wis. 2d 265,
500 N.W.2d 354 (Ct. App. 1993).
632.32 Annotation
Despite policy restrictions to the contrary, under sub. (3) separate coverage must be provided to both a named insured and an additional insured when both are actively negligent. Iaquinta v. Allstate Insurance Co.
180 Wis. 2d 661,
510 N.W.2d 715 (Ct. App. 1993).
632.32 Annotation
Sub. (4) (a) does not require the named insured in commercial fleet policies, if the named insured is a corporation or government entity, to be interpreted as including all of the entity's employees. Meyer v. City of Amery,
185 Wis. 2d 537,
518 N.W.2d 296 (Ct. App. 1994).
632.32 Annotation
The uninsured motorist coverage requirements of s. 632.32 are inapplicable to self-insured entities under s. 344.16. Classified Insurance Co. v. Budget Rent-A-Car Inc.
186 Wis. 2d 476,
521 N.W.2d 478 (Ct. App. 1994).
632.32 Annotation
Sub. (3) (a) does not apply to uninsured motorist coverage so that a permissive user is entitled to increased coverage limits purchased for specifically named persons not including the user. American Hardware Mutual Insurance Co. v. Steberger,
187 Wis. 2d 681,
523 N.W.2d 187 (Ct. App. 1994).
632.32 Annotation
A medical insurer with subrogation rights may be an injured person under sub. (4). An auto insurance policy providing that uninsured motorist coverage does not apply to persons claiming by right of subrogation, impermissibly reduces coverage that the statute mandates for injured persons. WEA Insurance Corp. v. Freiheit,
190 Wis. 2d 111,
527 N.W.2d 363 (Ct. App. 1994).
632.32 Annotation
No policy issued pursuant to the ch. 344 financial responsibility statutes may exclude coverage for persons related by blood or marriage to the operator as mandated by s. 632.32 (6) (b) 1. Bindrim v. Colonial Ins. Co.
190 Wis. 2d 525,
527 N.W.2d 321 (1995).
632.32 Annotation
This section does not prevent the exclusion of coverage of vehicles used solely on the insured's premises. Rea v. Transportation Ins. Co.
191 Wis. 2d 271,
528 N.W.2d 79 (Ct. App. 1995).
632.32 Annotation
This section does not distinguish between an owner and a named insurer. A policy that excludes coverage to the owner of a vehicle covered by the policy violates this section. Kettner v. Wausau Insurance Cos.
191 Wis. 2d 724,
530 N.W.2d 399 (Ct. App. 1995).
632.32 Annotation
When the insurer defines uninsurance as including underinsurance, all case law concerning an insurer's duties and limitations in an uninsurance situation apply. Kuhn v. Allstate Ins. Co.
193 Wis. 2d 50,
532 N.W.2d 124 (1995).
632.32 Annotation
An uninsured motorist policy that restricted coverage to cases when the insured is "hit" or "struck" was void. A bite by a dog tied in a parked vehicle was the result of use of the vehicle and subject to coverage. Trampf v. Prudential Property & Casualty Co.
199 Wis. 2d 380,
544 N.W.2d 596 (Ct. App. 1996).
632.32 Annotation
Under the subrogation provision of sub. (4) (b), there is no requirement that the insurer plead setoff or file a counterclaim in order to recover payments made to or on behalf of its insured. Jones v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
212 Wis. 2d 165,
567 N.W.2d 904 (Ct. App. 1997).
632.32 Annotation
When the named insured is a corporation, but the insurer knows the covered vehicles are owned by individuals and used by family members, this section does not distinguish between the owner of the vehicle and the named insurer in determining coverage. Greene v. General Casualty Co.
216 Wis. 2d 152,
576 N.W.2d 56 (Ct. App. 1997).
632.32 Annotation
Sub. (4) does not prohibit the application of a policy arbitration clause to a disputed claim under the policy's uninsured motorist clause. Jones v. Poole,
217 Wis. 2d 116,
579 N.W.2d 739 (Ct. App. 1998).
632.32 Annotation
Because a business operates under a variety of "d/b/a" designations and provides a spectrum of services, some of which qualify under sub. (5) (c) and some of which do not, does not operate to bar the coverage restrictions under that paragraph. That a policy names a "d/b/a" designation does not prevent looking to the entire legal entity to apply sub. (5) (c). Binon v. Great Northern Insurance Co.
218 Wis. 2d 26,
580 N.W.2d 370 (Ct. App. 1998).
632.32 Annotation
Neither statutes nor case law expressly prohibit territorial limitations on uninsured motorist coverage. A clause restricting the territorial application of uninsured motorist coverage is valid. Clark v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co.
218 Wis. 2d 169,
577 N.W.2d 790 (1998).
632.32 Annotation
Sub. (6) (b) 1. prevents insurers from excluding persons related by blood or marriage from coverage under a liability policy, but is inapplicable to other than liability policies. Peabody v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co.
220 Wis. 2d 340,
582 N.W.2d 753 (Ct. App. 1998).
632.32 Annotation
Uninsured motorist coverage under sub. (4) (a) 2. b. for a hit and run requires contact between the unidentified vehicle and the insured's vehicle. That an unidentified vehicle struck a 3rd vehicle, which then struck the insured's vehicle in a chain reaction, is insufficient. Smith v. General Casualty Insurance Co.
230 Wis. 2d 411,
601 N.W.2d 844 (Ct. App. 1999).
632.32 Annotation
No hit and run under sub. (4) (a) 2. b. occurred when the insured's vehicle was struck by ice that dislodged from an unidentified truck as it passed. Dehnel v. State Farm Mutual Insurance Co.
231 Wis. 2d 14,
604 N.W.2d 575 (Ct. App. 1999).
632.32 Annotation
Sub. (4) requires uninsured motorist coverage when a detached piece of an unidentified motor vehicle is propelled into the insured's motor vehicle by an unidentified motor vehicle. Theis v. Midwest Security Insurance Co. 2000 WI 15,
232 Wis. 2d 749,
606 N.W.2d 162.
632.32 Annotation
Sub. (5) (j) allows "drive other car" exclusions in only very narrow and specific circumstances. It did not allow exclusion of uninsured motorist coverage for an insured injured while occupying a fire truck in the course of her employment. Blazekovic v. City of Milwaukee, 2000 WI 41,
234 Wis. 2d 587,
610 N.W.2d 467.
632.32 Annotation
Although only one parent was the named insured under an uninsured motorist insurance policy paying benefits for the wrongful death of their child, s. 895.04 requires payment of the proceeds to both parents. The purpose of the coverage is to reimburse the victim. If the victim is deceased the compensation must go to the victim's survivors, not to other insureds. Bruflat v. Prudential Property & Casualty Insurance Co. 2000 WI 69,
233 Wis. 2d 523,
608 N.W.2d 371.
632.32 Annotation
Neither sub. (6) nor s. 344.33 requires an automobile insurance policy to include motorcycle coverage. Beerbohm v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 2000 WI App 105,
235 Wis. 2d 182,
612 N.W.2d 338.
632.32 Annotation
Sub. (5) (i) does not deprive an insured of any state or federal constitutional right to enter into an insurance contract without fraud. An insurer may reduce payments made pursuant to an underinsured motorist clause by amounts received from other legally responsible parties, provided that a fixed level of recovery that will be arrived at by combining payments is clearly stated. Dowhower v. West Bend Mutual Insurance Co. 2000 WI 73,
236 Wis. 2d 113,
613 N.W.2d 557.
632.32 Annotation
No statute requires a self-insured entity under s. 344.16 to provide uninsured motorist coverage as part of the optional insurance it offers to its customers. Prophet v. Enterprise Rent-A-Car Company, Inc. 2000 WI App 171,
238 Wis. 2d 150,
617 N.W.2d 225.
632.32 Annotation
A hit and run under sub. (4) (a) 2. b. requires: 1) an unidentified motor vehicle that; 2) is involved in a "hit;" and 3) "runs" from the accident scene. Physical contact must be present. A hit and run occurs when an unidentified vehicle hits an intermediate vehicle, propelling it into the insured vehicle. Smith v. General Casualty Co. 2000 WI 127,
239 Wis. 2d 646,
619 N.W.2d 882.
632.32 Annotation
This section applies only to policies issued and delivered in Wisconsin. Danielson v. Gasper, 2000 WI App 12,
240 Wis. 2d 633,
623 N.W.2d 182.
632.32 Annotation
When uninsured motorist coverage in the amount of $25,000 was contracted for in violation of the requirement for $50,000 coverage under sub. (4m) (d), the higher level of coverage was read into the policy under s. 631.15 (3m), even though it was not reflected in the premium paid. Brunson v. Ward, 2001 WI 89,
245 Wis. 2d 163,
629 N.W.2d 140.
632.32 Annotation
The statute of limitations for subrogation claims under sub. (4) (a) 3. is the statute of limitations on the underlying tort. Schwittay v. Sheboygan Falls Mutual Insurance Co. 2001 WI App 140,
246 Wis. 2d 385,
630 N.W.2d 772.
632.32 Annotation
Sub. (6) (a) was applicable to a general liability policy that contained an endorsement for non-owned liability coverage. Heritage Mutual Insurance Co. v. Wilber, 2001 WI App 247,
248 Wis. 2d 111,
635 N.W.2d 631.
632.32 Annotation
Sub. (5) (f) contains no requirement that a policy clause contain specific language or that the policy parrot the statute in order for an antistacking provision to be enforceable. Gragg v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. 2001 WI App 272,
248 Wis. 2d 735,
637 N.W.2d 477.
632.32 Annotation
An underinsured motorist provision that required the named insurer to be an occupant of an insured vehicle violated sub. (6) (b) 2. a. because the occupancy requirement had the effect of excluding coverage for a named insured. Mau v. North Dakota Insurance Reserve Fund, 2001 WI 134,
248 Wis. 2d 1031,
637 N.W.2d 45.
632.32 Annotation
An underinsured motorist provision that required the named insurer to be an occupant of an insured vehicle was a "drive other car" exclusion under sub. (5) (j) because it had the effect of excluding coverage for a named insured not occupying the insured vehicle. Because the vehicle was a rental vehicle, it did not meet the requirement of sub. (5) (j) 1. that a vehicle subject to a permissible "drive other car" exclusion must be owned by a named insured or related party. Mau v. North Dakota Insurance Reserve Fund, 2001 WI 134,
248 Wis. 2d 1031,
637 N.W.2d 45.
632.32 Annotation
Sub. (5) (i) 1. does not permit an uninsured motorist insurer to reduce its coverage by an amount the insured received from another uninsured motorist insurer. A reduction for payments by a party responsible for the injury permitted under sub. (5) (i) 1. refers to payments made by or on behalf of a tortfeasor. Janssen v. State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Co. 2002 WI App 72,
251 Wis. 2d 660,
643 N.W.2d 857.
632.32 Annotation
For actions seeking coverage under an underinsured motorist policy, the statute of limitations begins to run from the date of loss, which is the date on which a final resolution is reached in the underlying claim against the tortfeasor, be it through denial of that claim, settlement, judgment, execution of releases, or other form of resolution, whichever is the latest. Yocherer v. Farmers Insurance Exchange, 2002 WI 41,
252 Wis. 2d 114,
643 N.W.2d 457.
632.32 Annotation
Although a reducing clause in the underinsured (UIM) motorist provisions of a policy may comport with the requirements of sub. (5) (i), it may not, when viewed in the context of the entire policy, clearly set forth that the insured is purchasing a fixed level of UIM recovery arrived at by combining payments from all sources. In that case, the reducing clause is ambiguous and unenforceable, and renders the UIM coverage illusory. Badger Mutual Insurance Co. v. Schmitz, 2002 WI 98, ___ Wis. 2d ___,
647 N.W.2d 223.
632.32 Annotation
Uninsured motorist coverage: Wisconsin courts open up additional avenues of recovery. Dunphy. WBB Nov. 1982.
632.34
632.34
Defense of noncooperation. If a policy of automobile liability insurance provides a defense to the insurer for lack of cooperation on the part of the insured, the defense is not effective against a 3rd person making a claim against the insurer unless there was collusion between the 3rd person and the insured or unless the claimant was a passenger in or on the insured vehicle. If the defense is not effective against the claimant, after payment the insurer is subrogated to the injured person's claim against the insured to the extent of the payment and is entitled to reimbursement by the insured.
632.34 History
History: 1975 c. 375,
421;
1979 c. 102,
104,
177.
632.34 Annotation
Legislative Council Note, 1979: This provision is continued from former s. 632.34 (8). It is changed from a required provision of the policy to a rule of law. It is not the kind of rule that needs to be put in the policy to inform the policyholder. Indeed, the policyholder should receive no encouragement to fail to cooperate. This is a relaxation of present law. [Bill 146-S]
632.34 Annotation
Prejudice is not a component of the defense of noncooperation. Schaefer v. Northern Assurance Co.
182 Wis. 2d 148,
513 N.W.2d 16 (Ct. App. 1994).
632.35
632.35
Prohibited rejection, cancellation and nonrenewal. No insurer may cancel or refuse to issue or renew an automobile insurance policy wholly or partially because of one or more of the following characteristics of any person: age, sex, residence, race, color, creed, religion, national origin, ancestry, marital status or occupation.
632.35 History
History: 1975 c. 375;
1979 c. 102.
632.36
632.36
Accident in the course of business or employment. 632.36(1)(1)
Rate and other terms. An insurer may increase or charge a higher rate for a motor vehicle liability insurance policy issued or renewed on or after April 16, 1982, on the basis of an accident which occurs while the insured is operating a motor vehicle in the course of the insured's business or employment, only if the policy covers the insured for liability arising in the course of the insured's business or employment. An insurer may issue or renew a motor vehicle liability insurance policy on or after November 1, 1989, on terms that are less favorable to the insured than would otherwise be offered, including but not limited to the rate, because of an accident which occurs while the insured is operating a motor vehicle in the course of the insured's business or employment, only if the policy covers the insured for liability arising in the course of the insured's business or employment.
632.36(2)
(2) Cancellation or nonrenewal. An insurer may cancel a motor vehicle liability insurance policy that is issued or renewed on or after November 1, 1989, or refuse to renew a motor vehicle liability insurance policy on or after November 1, 1989, on the basis of an accident which occurs while the insured is operating a motor vehicle in the course of the insured's business or employment, only if the policy covers the insured for liability arising in the course of the insured's business or employment.
632.36 History
History: 1981 c. 178;
1989 a. 31.
632.365
632.365
Use of emission inspection data in setting rates. An insurer may not use odometer reading data collected in the course of an inspection under
s. 110.20 (6) or
(7) as a factor in setting rates or premiums for a motor vehicle liability insurance policy or as a factor in altering rates or premiums during the term, or at renewal, of such a policy. However, an insurer may use such data as a basis for investigation into the number of miles that the motor vehicle is normally driven.
632.365 History
History: 1991 a. 279;
1993 a. 213.
632.37
632.37
Motor vehicle glass repair practices; restriction on specifying vendor. An insurer that issues a motor vehicle insurance policy covering the repair or replacement of motor vehicle glass may not require, as a condition of that coverage, that an insured, or a 3rd party, making a claim under the policy for the repair or replacement of motor vehicle glass obtain services or parts from a particular vendor, or in a particular location, specified by the insurer.
632.37 History
History: 1991 a. 269.
632.38
632.38
Nonoriginal manufacturer replacement parts. 632.38(1)(a)
(a) "Insured" means the person who owns the motor vehicle that is subject to repair or the person seeking the repair on behalf of the owner.
632.38(1)(b)
(b) "Insurer's representative" means a person, excluding the person repairing the motor vehicle, who has agreed in writing to represent an insurer with respect to a claim.
