[Sankar]

Apart from Innova the same transmission is used on other rear wheel drive Toyotas including 2WD Hilux, Fortuner, Hiace, Tacoma etc. and 4x4 variant of this transmission (most parts are shared including the culprits of this story i.e., transmission pan, the bolt and the washer) drives the 4WD Hilux, Tacoma, Fortuner and also the Prado all over the world since 2015. This 6 speed transmission replaced the older 5 speed RWD and 4WD auto transmission for these vehicles. The new Mahindra Thar also use the same transmission in their AT models, another non Toyota vehicle in India that gets this transmission is the facelifted Isuzu pickup with 6 speed AT.

Ditch HDFC ERGO and their kindergarten science forensic report when its time for renewal and go with Toyota Protect or something better if there is. Toyota just went up one notch higher in my books for covering something that they need not have covered.

[Holyghost]

Originally Posted by Mail.atyagi

My 2016 Innova Crysta GX 2.8 AT met with a strange accident in January 2021. I ran it over a small rod-like metal object while driving. The underbody got scraped by the metal object which unfortunately hit exactly on the Automatic Transmission pan and seems like it removed the nut which led to transmission oil drainage. This led to the automatic transmission behaving erratically. The rpm surged abnormally during gearshifts and reverse gear wasn't engaging easily.

How much distance did you drive after the underbody hit? How long did it took to notice the gear box issues?

There is a "Consequential Damage" clause in car insurance policies which is used to deny insurance claims for engine damage due to oil starvation in such circumstances. Unless you have an "Engine Protector" add-on, it is difficult to get insurance if the vehicle has been driven for considerable KMs after an under body damage.

Originally Posted by Jeroen

I hate to be a party pooper, but I too find it extremely unlikely that such a drain nut gets loosened by a (foreign) object hitting against it. If it did, I would think there would be visible damage to the thread.
...
If that drain plug was installed properly I don’t see it coming undone by something scraping across the sump. Obviously it was not sheared off, as that would definitely show. The drain plug must have been loose before, or maybe an incorrect size or type was fitted.

Even I too think on the same lines. A single hit on the nut wont be enough to remove it. So even if we agree that the hit happened exactly at the correct point and at correct angle, the nut will not simply fall off immediately. It will take a considerable time for the nut to loosen and fall off and the vehicle would have covered quite a distance.

[Sankar]

Originally Posted by Holyghost

How much distance did you drive after the underbody hit? How long did it took to notice the gear box issues?

There is a "Consequential Damage" clause in car insurance policies which is used to deny insurance claims for engine damage due to oil starvation in such circumstances. Unless you have an "Engine Protector" add-on, it is difficult to get insurance if the vehicle has been driven for considerable KMs after an under body damage.

This is correct. But if that was the case I wonder why the insurer did not raise that clause and instead went for the forensic route to reject the claim citing hit wasn't the cause.

[Holyghost]

Originally Posted by Sankar

This is correct. But if that was the case I wonder why the insurer did not raise that clause and instead went for the forensic route to reject the claim citing hit wasn't the cause.

Probably they might have found it easier to show the damage did not happen due to the accident.
To use the consequential damage clause, the insurer will have to accept that the damage was due to the underbody accident and then deny the insurance. That will put them at a higher risk since they now have to prove when and where the accident took place and how many KMs the vehicle was driven. Most probably they must have kept that clause for later use if and when the OP fights the current finding in court.

[Mail.atyagi]

Originally Posted by Turbanator

I will agree with your observations. It might be possible that somebody outside the dealership had tried to open this mistaking it with something else (and the bolt got lose afterwards). It will be easier if OP can check if he went outside for any repairs?

Not even a single instance the vehicle went outside for any repairs except tyre change more than 2 years back.

Originally Posted by Holyghost

How much distance did you drive after the underbody hit? How long did it took to notice the gear box issues?

There is a "Consequential Damage" clause in car insurance policies which is used to deny insurance claims for engine damage due to oil starvation in such circumstances. Unless you have an "Engine Protector" add-on, it is difficult to get insurance if the vehicle has been driven for considerable KMs after an under body damage.
.

Not much distance covered. Even the transmission Pan had some oil left when surveyed by the insurance surveyor. Also, engine and transmission damage add-on was also taken in insurance.

Originally Posted by Sankar

This is correct. But if that was the case I wonder why the insurer did not raise that clause and instead went for the forensic route to reject the claim citing hit wasn't the cause.

Absolutely, had this been the case, they would not have gone for forensic analysis. IMHO, They would not have been able to defend the consequential damages.
The insurance company also conducted a fact finding study initially wherein I was asked to show the accident spot to the agency they hired for same and they did some surveys like distance travelled, oil marks(after a week of the accident) and what not etc.

I got some learnings too from this incident -
1. Click a lot of pictures of the vehicle as well as the accident scene. Video would be great. Tag geo location also.
2. Try to find someone who can be a witness like nearby shopkeeper etc.
3. Call the insurance company immediately and inform about the accident even if you're not sure of the extent. Record the call if possible and do take a call log number.
4. Try booking the towing service from insurance company or the dealer rather than arranging private towing service. If both are not possible then only go for towing on your own.
5. Don't give in if the dealer says they will inspect the vehicle later. Ensure inspection in your presence.
I made these mistakes and in my case this later led to a suggestion by insurance company official that the marks on transmission pan may not be due to accident as it is set high but this could be sabotage by the dealer to avoid warranty claim).
6. Be persistent and don't give up easily.
7. In the end, don't take this too much on your heart. Your peace of mind is very important.

Thanks !

[Sankar]

Originally Posted by Holyghost

Probably they might have found it easier to show the damage did not happen due to the accident.
To use the consequential damage clause, the insurer will have to accept that the damage was due to the underbody accident and then deny the insurance. That will put them at a higher risk since they now have to prove when and where the accident took place and how many KMs the vehicle was driven. Most probably they must have kept that clause for later use if and when the OP fights the current finding in court.

Actually the proving the consequential damage would have been easier for the insurer and close this once and for all, they could have pulled the data from the vehicle computer from the moment/kms transmission started behaving abnormally and the kms recorded when the vehicle was taken in for repairs.

Originally Posted by Mail.atyagi

I ran it over a small rod-like metal object while driving. The underbody got scraped by the metal object which unfortunately hit exactly on the Automatic Transmission pan and seems like it removed the nut which led to transmission oil drainage. This led to the automatic transmission behaving erratically. The rpm surged abnormally during gearshifts and reverse gear wasn't engaging easily.

[BhaskarG]

Originally Posted by Mail.atyagi

Insurance is through HDFC Ergo and not through Toyota Protect. The customer service even suggested me that if it was Toyota Protect, TKM would have ensured the insurer honoured the claim.

Ok,we are blacklisting HDFC Ergo for my next purchases to stay on the safer side. Thanks for mentioning the insurer.

I have seen that the insurance experience is much better if we take the OEM endorsed product (for example Toyota Protect in your case) in return of a small premium. I had tried both ways, and telling this from my first hand experience.

On the other hand, I have a gut feeling that the nut was loose and just fell off. The insurer might be right, I think. But I do not understand why surveyors are always in the denial mode, as if they are paid incentives for denying claims? When something is not done intentionally, give the benefit to the customers!!

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Mail.atyagi

If I wasn't driving it myself while the accident happened, I would also have thought the same. But my fair opinion, without any positive/negative bias towards either manufacturer or insurer, is that it was purely accidental. One of those unfortunate cases

Originally Posted by locusjag

I'm an insurance domain consultant by profession. I too thought about it from the same angle as you did, but then I think this comes under the Comprehensive coverage that applies to the car. Collision coverage applies when other automobiles collide with one's own car; but Comprehensive coverage kicks in with fire, theft, vandalism, falling objects, hitting road debris etc.

In my opinion, this is a case for the IRDAI appointed Insurance ombudsman to look at. The insurer had no business rejecting the claim, unless they can prove that the policyholder had broken the law when incurring the damage, or if insurance coverage was inactive when it occurred, if the car was modified and not notified on the RC and policy document etc.

I think we can safely agree that the drain plug did not come off due to anything scraping along the sump. The only way it can come off, if it was not properly fitted, or fitted with an incorrect drain plug.

The question remains if such an event would be covered by a (comprehensive) insurance coverage. I am not an insurance expert, I am not sure if it is covered under “accidental damage”. It’s a case I think of sloppy workmanship on the part of whoever put that drain plug on. Would sloppy workmanship be covered under these sort of comprehensive insurances?

We all like to think that when taking out comprehensive insurance it covers everything. But it does not. That is why it is called comprehensive and not “Everything and Anything covered” I guess.

Jeroen

[Mail.atyagi]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

I think we can safely agree that the drain plug did not come off due to anything scraping along the sump. The only way it can come off, if it was not properly fitted, or fitted with an incorrect drain plug.

The question remains if such an event would be covered by a (comprehensive) insurance coverage. I am not an insurance expert, I am not sure if it is covered under “accidental damage”. It’s a case I think of sloppy workmanship on the part of whoever put that drain plug on. Would sloppy workmanship be covered under these sort of comprehensive insurances?

We all like to think that when taking out comprehensive insurance it covers everything. But it does not. That is why it is called comprehensive and not “Everything and Anything covered” I guess.

Jeroen

I don't think the plug is even touched by the workshop. It's an absolutely no-go area during normal service. Hence I find it hard to digest that drain plug was incorrectly fitted or wrong plug was fitted.

[locusjag]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

It’s a case I think of sloppy workmanship on the part of whoever put that drain plug on. Would sloppy workmanship be covered under these sort of comprehensive insurances?

We all like to think that when taking out comprehensive insurance it covers everything. But it does not. That is why it is called comprehensive and not “Everything and Anything covered” I guess.

Sloppy workmanship wouldn't be covered under Comprehensive coverage. That's simply a liability on the dealership's part, and further subject to any Business Liability insurance they may or may not have...

For personal automobile insurance coverage to apply here, it will apply as long as it is not ruled out by these usual disqualifying factors:
* Was any illegal act in progress when the loss even occurred? (speeding, modifications done to the car that should have been notified in the Registration and policy etc.)
* Was the event an actual accidental event or a gradual process? (e.g., if rust and material degradation occurs and an accident subsequently occurs, insurance coverage wouldn't apply. Coverage is meant only for abrupt events and not to processes like rust, mold, fungal damage etc. which cause subsequent damages or accidents)

Edit:
Insurance coverage can also be denied like someone brilliantly pointed out on the top of this particular page, since the car was driven long after the loss event occurred. Even the ombudsman may side with the insurer on this count. It is the policyholder's duty to protect the property after a loss event occurs (which is why we are duty bound to push our crashed car away from traffic to the highway shoulder to prevent further collisions, as an example).

[iamitp]

How can we prevent such underbody hits? Any tips or hacks? Would underbody coatings (such as 3M) help?

[locusjag]

Originally Posted by iamitp

How can we prevent such underbody hits? Any tips or hacks? Would underbody coatings (such as 3M) help?

I love what Leoshashi did when he bought his new XL6. He figured out that his car's underbody and sensitive parts were dangerously exposed to accidentally flicked flying stones etc. He then figured out which Suzuki underbody plate fits the XL6 and fitted it himself. He even pointed out to which other Suzuki models that particular part can be fitted om his ownership thread. That's the kind of forward-thinking a car owner needs to have.

But beyond a point, apart from protecting a car's underbody (with driving habits and other proactive measures such as the one I'd mentioned), I'm not sure we can do much.

[Sankar]

Originally Posted by iamitp

How can we prevent such underbody hits? Any tips or hacks? Would underbody coatings (such as 3M) help?

I think you were joking about the part in bold.

A custom underbody shield made from aluminium or mild steel like offroaders use will prevent any damages if the underbody does get hit. Since this is a body on frame vehicle it is easy to get one made and mount it under the chassis.

[iamitp]

Originally Posted by locusjag

I love what Leoshashi did when he bought his new XL6. He figured out that his car's underbody and sensitive parts were dangerously exposed to accidentally flicked flying stones etc. He then figured out which Suzuki underbody plate fits the XL6 and fitted it himself. He even pointed out to which other Suzuki models that particular part can be fitted om his ownership thread. That's the kind of forward-thinking a car owner needs to have.

But beyond a point, apart from protecting a car's underbody (with driving habits and other proactive measures such as the one I'd mentioned), I'm not sure we can do much.

Originally Posted by Sankar

I think you were joking about the part in bold.

A custom underbody shield made from aluminium or mild steel like offroaders use will prevent any damages if the underbody does get hit. Since this is a body on frame vehicle it is easy to get one made and mount it under the chassis.

An underbody shield/plate would be ideal. I shall explore what can be done for my Creta 2020.

No I wasn't kidding about the 3M coating. If the coating is thick enough and rubberised, wouldn't it absorb at-least a bit of the impact?

[Sankar]

Originally Posted by iamitp

An underbody shield/plate would be ideal. I shall explore what can be done for my Creta 2020.

No I wasn't kidding about the 3M coating. If the coating is thick enough and rubberised, wouldn't it absorb at-least a bit of the impact?

1) Thick rubberised underbody coating don't do much against a rock.
2) This coating should not be applied on any engine, transmission, brake parts etc it's strictly for chassis/body.