Originally Posted by
alchemista
Please explain how use of a discount code can DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY CAUSE an accident.
The scenario which they are thinking is that you violate the terms by, for example, driving off road and getting in an accident. Or, driving to another country not allowed which could cause the car to be seized. That type of scenario where you are violating the rental agreement could indeed directly or indirectly cause a loss and they will exclude. Using a discount code cannot directly or indirectly cause an accident or loss of the vehicle.
To bring this up again, it still does appear to me that the insurance company has grounds to deny coverage based on fraudulent use of the CDP. Looking at the
Amex Platinum benefit guide, one of the clauses is:
WHAT IS NOT COVERED?
A. ALL Benefits -
3. use of the Rental Vehicle in violation of the terms and conditions of the Rental Agreement
Looking at a
Hertz rental agreement:
5. PROHIBITED USE OF THE CAR
NEITHER YOU NOR ANY AUTHORIZED OPERATOR MAY:
e. USE OR PERMIT THE USE OF THE CAR BY ANYONE:
8) IF THE CAR HAS BEEN OBTAINED FROM HERTZ BY FRAUD OR MISREPRESENTATION.
The rental record also states the following every time I've rented:
You Represent That You Are Specifically Authorized to Receive The Benefits Extended To Employees/Members Of <CDP Name Here>
It seems very clear cut to me that the agreement requires you to be eligible for the CDP discount; misrepresentation at this point in turn prohibits you from using the car. In turn, misusing the car at that point is not covered by the Amex Platinum insurance.
Looking at another contender, Chase Sapphire Reserve:
What’s Not Covered?
The Auto Rental Collision Damage Waiver benefit does not apply to:
• Any violation of the auto rental agreement or this benefit
While it's not as clear, it would also be hard to argue that damages arising while use of the car is prohibited (due to misrepresentation in its acquisition) should be covered by the policy.
Lastly, looking at the terms of a State Farm policy, the following is of interest:
There is no coverage under this policy if you or any other person insured under this policy has made false statements with the intent to conceal or misrepresent any material fact or circumstance in connection with any claim under this policy.
Again, pointing that misrepresentation in the rental agreement is a basis to deny coverage.
Now in practice, these insurance examiners deal with large volumes of cases. For a small amount, they might not even bother looking at the CDP and validating eligibility. But if you rent a Range Rover and total it, and the insurance is on the hook for $75k, you best believe that Amex (or Chubb, or State Farm) has a fiduciary duty to its shareholders to do its due diligence and deny as needed. The rental car agency may of course also place you on its DNR list.
The question to ask yourself is: how comfortable are you with the risk of being on the hook for $XXX worth of damage? Clearly there are many uninsured drivers on the road who take the risk, but it's also likely they don't have many assets to lose.