Hacker News Reader

The article doesn’t say his insurance wouldn’t cover it. It says his comprehensive coverage on his insurance wouldn’t cover it. Which is highly likely because this type of incident is usually a collision claim.

If he has comprehensive at all then he almost certainly has collision coverage. It’s just that, then it’s $16k accident that’s he’s at fault for.

View on HN

I'm not sure if it said he had comprehensive, sounds like he didn't, but the wording is a bit strange.

> "the owner's insurance policy didn't cover comprehensive claims from road debris"

My guess was that this would have been a comprehensive claim, but he didn't have that insurance plan. Could just be a deceptive play on words to evade the real issue...

I am not aware of any US insurer or state where striking an object on a road would be a comprehensive claim. After watching the video I think he’s probably just confusing the two. Which might be likely since he clearly doesn’t have his whole insurance situation figured out.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com