The insurer sought reconsideration of the Tribunal’s decision that the claimant’s newly purchased motorcycle was insured under the policy as a “newly acquired automobile”. The insurer’s arguments were primarily based on failure to follow two Superior Court decisions. Vice Chair Flude rejected the reconsideration, holding that he did not make an error that would change the result. He held that his initial decision did consider the relevant case law, but came to a different result based on factual distinctions.
