There is a strange phenomenon that happens as we age. We either start making to much money, start spending less money on foolish things like food, rent and clothing, or we start to truly appreciate fine machinery. Whatever the reason behind it, we all of sudden have more than one cycle. And heaven knows that each one serves some sort of purpose. The beater for reminders of days gone by, or the "boat" for cruising, or the little rocket for the Sunday blast. Eventually the garage looks like a small town repair facility with extra parts acquired over the years. And if owning a few cycles isn't expensive enough, trying to find reason behind insuring all of them can be a lesson in futility.

I am constantly being asked why a motorcycle insurance company cannot (or will not) issue one policy to cover the rider rather than the cycle. After the question is asked it never fails that the following line in thrown in...."...after all, I can only ride one of them at a time!!" True. Physically you can only be on one cycle at any given time. But, legally you can be on all of them at one time! Sound confusing? Read on for some ground rules to help clear the matter.

The ultimate liability for any damages done by your vehicle rests with you, the owner. Most of choose to "pass" that liability on to our insurance carrier by purchasing insurance. That way, if our cycle does damage to someone or something, our insurance picks up the tab. The state will allow us to enter into certain agreements about the use and coverage pertaining to that policy. But they do have limits! For example, it is possible to add certain "provisions" that will deny coverage in certain occurrences. The most popular one allows the insurance company to deny coverage (not pay) for damages to your cycle if it is being operated by someone who is not specifically named on your policy. The reasoning behind this one is pretty straight forward. The insurance company wants to rate the policy based on the person who is riding the cycle. If you are 112, have a few decades of experience and completed 23 riding classes, your rate is going to reflect that. Loaning your turbo-charged, seven valve per cylinder, lowflying aircraft to your 19 nephew is viewed upon dimly by the insurance companies. They feel that they are being cheated out of a couple of thousand dollars in premium. If your nephew ruins your bike, tough. You and nephew can have a heart to heart and sort it out. The only "victim" in this scenario is yourself. Since you created the scene, you're far from innocent. No one will really call you a victim here.

If the above scenario happened, and little Jr. hit a pedestrian, now we have a truly innocent victim. Grandma Moses is struck by Jr. and now wants your woes taken care. The insurance company can pull out every signed waiver they have and point to you for failure to name Jr. on the policy, and you can point to the insurance company, and so on. When Grandma Moses finally takes everyone to court, the judge tells the insurance company to just pay it and shut up. The State of California does not allow someone to be an innocent victim of some foolhardy agreement made between you and the insurance carrier. Bottom line is this....the insurance has to pay for any damage done by your cycle. It doesn't really matter who creates it. And...if the damages are above your policy limits, you are liable for the balance...not Jr. So, let's get back to our original story.

While it is impossible to ride to both cycles at the same time, it is certainly possible to have ALL of your cycles on the road at the same time. Each creating a risk and potential liability to the insurance carrier and you. The fact that you would not lend your cycle to someone, or that you are willing to sign a multitude of waivers doesn't matter. The state overrides that in the event of a liability claim. I jokingly refer to it as the Malcolm Forbes Law. While Malcolm could only ride one bike at a time, there were Sundays that he had 60 cycles on the road creating 60 potential claims.

As much as I don't agree with the situation, most companies abide by it and only offer one cycle per policy. There are executives within the insurance companies who are cyclists and own more than one bike. Their views are pretty much the same, they would like to see a solution. However, until there can be an agreement that will keep the cyclist happy, the insurance company happy, and the state happy, we may be stuck with the present situation.