Under comprehensive coverage of a business auto policy, which of the following scenarios would not qualify as a covered loss?

The scenario involving a driver hitting a guardrail after sliding on icy pavement would not qualify as a covered loss under comprehensive coverage because it is considered to be an accident caused by a collision rather than a non-collision event. Comprehensive coverage typically protects against losses that arise from causes other than a collision, such as theft, vandalism, fire, or natural disasters. In this case, the incident is more aligned with collision coverage, which deals specifically with damage resulting from impacts with other objects.

In contrast, the other scenarios listed—such as the electrical wiring catching fire, tires being slashed, and tires being removed without evidence of forcible entry—are associated with risks that comprehensive coverage is designed to protect against. These incidents do not stem from vehicle collisions and fall within the scope of what comprehensive coverage is intended to cover, focusing on events that are outside the driver's control.