Results 1 to 4 of 4
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Hindi
      • Home Country:
      • India
      • Current Location:
      • India

    • Join Date: Nov 2014
    • Posts: 248
    #1

    would be covered or not

    We have project insurance policy, will check with the insurance team whether the below mentioned loss of damage would be covered or not.

    We have project insurance policy, will check with the insurance team whether the below mentioned loss of damage will be cover or not.


    Are both the above sentences correct?

    I understand if we use "will" then we can write "cover or not"

    Why it becomes covered if we use would?

  1. Raymott's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Australia
      • Current Location:
      • Australia

    • Join Date: Jun 2008
    • Posts: 24,091
    #2

    Re: would be covered or not

    No, neither is correct.
    "We have a project insurance policy. [Someone or something] will check with the insurance team whether the below mentioned loss of damage is covered or not."

    "We have a ... policy" or "We have insurance".
    You can't join two sentences with a comma, and the second needs a subject.
    If you have insurance, you are covered. If you have fire insurance, you don't become covered if a fire breaks out; you are already covered or you are not.
    You can't use "will be cover" - it's wrong. It's "covered" no matter what modal or auxiliary verb you use.

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Apr 2009
    • Posts: 12,307
    #3

    Re: would be covered or not

    "Loss of damage" seems odd to me.

  2. MikeNewYork's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Nov 2002
    • Posts: 24,983
    #4

    Re: would be covered or not

    It probably should be "loss or damage".

Similar Threads

  1. Still Covered
    By boddy in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 19-Apr-2014, 11:01
  2. [Vocabulary] we have got you covered.
    By maiabulela in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-Feb-2012, 16:48
  3. has(had) been covered
    By sbrodsky in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 31-Aug-2010, 19:52
  4. [General] covered with/covered in/covered by
    By vil in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-Sep-2008, 01:49

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •