Whoa boy. According to Reuters, Fisker has been denied some $33 million in damages by its insurance company, XL Group PLC, for 338 Karma sedans that were destroyed by Superstorm Sandy while at port in New Jersey. Not surprisingly, Fisker is suing the insurer, which is based in Dublin, Ireland but has offices in the US.

According to the report, the policy Fisker had obtained from XL covered the automaker for damages up to $100 million. At issue are important details that include "whether the cars were in "transit," and which sublimits may apply, if any," according to David Klein, a partner at Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe, in a phone interview with Reuters.

Fisker's 338 Karma sedans are just a few of the estimated 10,000 vehicles destroyed at the shipping facility in New Jersey. Total vehicular losses from Sandy, both new and used, are thought to have crested 200,000 units.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 71 Comments
      osthean
      • 12 Hours Ago
      porsche obviously has problems with their exterior design. but for the money you probably wont find a equal in value and performance
      John S
      • 2 Years Ago
      Health insurance or car insurance, they're all the g*dd*mn same. Always try to deny your claim at first.
      Eta Carinae
      • 2 Years Ago
      This may seem a tad harsh because it is........but as much as I would like it...I don't think fisker is going to survive, I mean I know they build a nice car(karma)....but compared to the launch of Tesla S in the same year and the amount of recalls on the karma already.......the Atlantic looks good and would love to see it in production with a lot other future fiskers...but again....I don't think they make it.
      dartingd
      • 2 Years Ago
      I think the main argument is what Fisker's shipping terms were and how things were being shipped in relation to those terms. FOB Origin means that when something leaves to go to its intended owner that owner takes ownership at time of departure. This of course means the shipping company, as stated earlier, would be the one who's insurance should pay up. There wasn't enough information here to make that determination, but it's a possibility.
      Roy_H
      • 2 Years Ago
      I would think a vehicle would be "in transit" until it was delivered at the final destination, i.e. the dealership. It doesn't make any sense to me that Fisker would purchase insurance for only a portion of the trip, i.e. on the ship only. Is this just posturing? Does the insurance company just figure if they deny the claim they might at least be able to bargain for a smaller pay-out? After all they have almost nothing to lose by going to court over it. What about all the non-Fisker cars, they would have been insured too. Are all the cars in the port being denied insurance payout?
      • 1 Year Ago
      The ‘in transit’ issue eluded to in the article probably relates to if vehicles were actually in transit on a truck (or rail if used) or were the vehicles actually at point of rest , waiting for a truck to pick them up. Technically, these situations are different when dealing with insurance. Another issue which could be of concern is who is actually owned the vehicles when they were damaged: Fisker or it’s dealers. If Fisker recognizes revenue from the sale when the vehicle leaves their plant to go to the dealer, the dealers would probably need a separate insurance policy. It could boil down to the Dealership Agreement between Fisker and it’s dealers.
        skierpage
        • 12 Hours Ago
        "Eluded" means to adroitly avoid or escape. You meant to use "alluded" but since that means to indirectly refer to something and the article directly talks about transit, "alluded" is the wrong $5 word anyway. You should have just said "The 'in transit' issue in the Reuters article probably relates to whether...". Also "it's dealers" is not a contraction of "it is dealers" or "it has dealers', so there's no apostrophe.
      Spartan
      • 2 Years Ago
      I can imagine that it would have been cheaper to contract a bunch of truck drivers to take those vehicles to a safer location than to deal with an insurance company that won't be able to pay out in the event of a crisis like this.
      coy_bell
      • 2 Years Ago
      my co-worker's ex-wife makes $82 an hour on the laptop. She has been fired for 5 months but last month her check was $21260 just working on the laptop for a few hours. Read more on this site....... BIT40.ℂOℳ
      • 2 Years Ago
      Sounds like XL provided the ocean cargo coverage, and the question is a matter of the contractual definition of "transit".
        Doug
        • 2 Years Ago
        Don't know why this perfectly reasonable comment was voted down. This was essentially my guess. Sounds like the cars were covered for transit from Finland to the dealerships. But these cars were just being stored at the port for months. Remember that Fisker hasn't built a Karma since last July at the latest; the storm was in October. So while we're still waiting for more details, my interpretation is the insurance company is claiming the cars were covered for transit, but not indefinite storage.
          Alfonso T. Alvarez
          • 12 Hours Ago
          @Doug
          Depends on the actual language of the insurance coverage. If it was FAS, (free alongside ship) Fisker is hosed - if DAP (delivered at place) which is the newer terminology used, that is open to interpretation and may make a legal case worth pursuing.
        SVX pearlie
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Michael: "Sounds like XL provided the ocean cargo coverage," Exactly. XL coverage may only have applied once loaded on the ship, versus sitting at the port. Or there may be a Force Majeure clause that excludes damage at port. Or it may be kind of like how homeowners insurance requires separate earthquake / flood / tornado riders & coverage. Or, it could be a question of overlapping coverage, such that the Port would have to pay for damage. Without a copy of the contract, and its definitions and exclusions, it's almost impossible to say.
      Dune It Up
      • 2 Years Ago
      i see chevy sparks.
      LongDucDong
      • 2 Years Ago
      Schemin' bastards!
      gearhead
      • 2 Years Ago
      Were the vehicles insured against damage/theft? Yes. Were they damaged? Yes. Seems simple.
        Drakkon
        • 12 Hours Ago
        @gearhead
        Damage from acts of god are insured differently than transit or 'marine' insurance (which applies to trucks too, not just on ships). Fisker may have bought smaller coverages for acts of god assuming not more than a few cars would be damaged by hail, debris etc. Marine insurance usually must be damaged in transport.
    • Load More Comments