ATVs: Are They Subject to Motor Vehicle Registration? – Claims Magazine

The ISO HO 00 03 04 91 form states that Property Not Covered includes "motor vehicles." However, the exclusion contains an exception for "vehicles . . . not subject to motor vehicle registration which are . . . used to service an insured's residence." On its face, this exclusion appears to be fairly straightforward. Nonetheless, as this Article points out, what constitutes "subject to motor vehicle registration" is not always clear. For example, in some states, all terrain vehicles ("ATVs") are subject to "registration," but not necessarily "motor vehicle registration."

The ISO HO 00 03 04 91 form does not define "motor vehicle." The common meaning of the word "vehicle" is "that in or on which a person or thing is or may be carried from one place to another, especially along the ground, also through the air; any moving support or container fitted or used for the conveyance of bulky objects; a means of conveyance." Moffitt v. State Auto. Ins. Ass'n, 300 N.W.837 (Neb. 1941) (quoting Webster's New International Dictionary); Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. German St. Vincent Orphan Ass'n, 54 S.W.3d 661 (Mo. Ct. App. 2001) (a vehicle is "a means of carrying or transporting something . . . a carrier of goods or passengers").

Clearly, an ATV is a vehicle, since it is designed to carry people or property from one location to another. Furthermore, an ATV has a motor. Thus, a good argument could be made that an ATV is a "motor vehicle." In MacLean v. Hingham Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 750 N.E.2d 494 (Mass. App. Ct. 2001), the court commented that an ATV was "a motorized land conveyance . . . ."

As noted above, not all motor vehicles are excluded from coverage. The ISO HO 00 03 04 91 form contains an exception to the motor vehicle exclusion for "vehicles . . . not subject to motor vehicle registration which are . . . used to service an insured's residence."

Thus, the key issue here (assuming that the insured's ATV was used to service the insured's residence) is whether the insured's ATV was subject to "motor vehicle" registration. Because we are dealing with exclusionary language, some courts have narrowly interpreted what constitutes "motor vehicle" registration. The mere fact that a vehicle, such as an ATV or a snowmobile, is subject to "registration," does not always mean it is subject to "motor vehicle registration." Some courts have construed this provision as applying only where the vehicle at issue is subject to registration under the motor vehicle code, or subject to registration through the Department of Motor Vehicles. For example, in Country-Wide Ins. Co. v. Manning, 465 N.E.2d 370 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984), the court held that snowmobiles, because they are excluded from Section 125 of the New York Vehicle and Traffic Law definition of "motor vehicle," are not subject to "motor vehicle registration," despite the fact that New York's "Registration of Snowmobiles, Motorboats and Limited Use Vehicles Act" (N.Y. Veh. & Traf. Law § 2222) required that snowmobiles be registered. In that same vein, in Showler v. American Mfrs. Mut. Ins. Co., 690 N.Y.S.2d 369 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999), the court held that an exception to a "motor vehicle" exclusion in an insured's Homeowners policy for "a motorized land conveyance designed for recreational use off public roads, not subject to motor vehicle registration" applied to an insured's on-premises use of his owned snowmobile.

Similarly, Pennsylvania law requires most ATVs to be registered with the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. Nevertheless, in an earlier case, Pelter v. Department of Transp., 663 A.2d 844 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1995), the court held that registration of an ATV with the Department of Environmental Resources is not registration of vehicles, as contemplated by the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law.

Also, in MacLean v. Hingham Mut. Fire ins. Co., 750 N.E.2d 494 (Mass. App. Ct. 2001), the court held that an ATV was "not subject to motor vehicle registration" and therefore fell within the exception to the motor vehicle exclusion in a Homeowners policy. Although the ATV was subject to environmental registration, the ATV was not subject to registration as a motor vehicle, because it was not designed for use on public roads.

Based upon these cases, it is possible that a court might find that the fact that an insured's ATV is subject to "registration" does not mean that it is necessarily subject to "motor vehicle registration," as defined by the motor vehicle laws of a particular state. Before a coverage determination can be made, insurers should check the motor vehicle code, as well as case law from their particular state, to see if an ATV is subject to "registration," and whether this registration is deemed "motor vehicle registration."

Note, ISO changed the exception to the motor vehicle exclusion in the 2000 edition of the HO-3 form. It now contains an exception for "motor vehicles not required to be registered for use on public roads or property . . . ." While no reported cases seem to have addressed this new language, it has potentially narrowed the exception to the motor vehicle exclusion.