Remove Claim Remove Damage Remove Insurance Policy
article thumbnail

Lack of Insurable Interest Precludes Recovery for Property Damage

The Property Insurance Law Observer

Consequently, the plaintiff was not entitled to indemnity for damage to the property it purported to insure under a commercial property insurance policy. [1] During the policy term, the business claimed that the properties suffered damage caused by a hurricane and submitted a claim to the insurer.

article thumbnail

Does my Landlords Insurance Policy cover terrorism

Prof. Allan Manning

This means that no Terrorism Levy is charged by Insurers and that if the Federal Government and the Minister for Finance in particular declares some event a terrorism event, then any exclusion found within a Landlord’s policy will not be void and claims where there is an exclusion will not be paid.

Policy 173
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Carolina Woman Charged with Using Mom’s Name to Get Policy, Filing Bogus Claim

Insurance Journal

A North Carolina woman is set for a court appearance later this month after she was charged with filing a claim on her deceased mom’s house – for damage that occurred before the insurance policy was purchased. Cindy Ramzi Hanna, …

Policy 263
article thumbnail

Does Commercial Property Insurance Cover Water Damage?

Tosten Marketing

Water damage can wreak havoc on commercial properties, leading to costly repairs and business disruptions. At Tosten Marketing, we often hear from business owners wondering about their insurance coverage for such incidents. Commercial property insurance water damage coverage is a complex topic with many nuances.

article thumbnail

Policyholders and Public Adjusters Often Need to Hire Their Own Experts—Part Two

Property Insurance Coverage Law

In yesterdays post, Policyholders and Public Adjusters Often Need to Hire Their Own Experts, the court found that the insurance policy did not provide coverage for the claimed damages for two primary reasons.1

article thumbnail

Court Differentiates Vandalism from Theft in First Party Insurance Policy

The Property Insurance Law Observer

On November 20, 2021, after the home was vacant for an extended period of time, unidentified individuals broke into and damaged Plaintiffs’ property, taking various items. The claim included the cost to replace various appliances, and an additional $1,310 for the value of other stolen personal property, including certain tools and clothing.

Theft 130
article thumbnail

Court Says Loose Bolt Remedied by Tightening Does not Constitute “Direct Physical Loss of or Damage” to Property

The Property Insurance Law Observer

American Guarantee and Liability Insurance Company , the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts held that a loose bolt or fitting that could be remedied simply by tightening it did not constitute “direct physical loss of or damage” to equipment covered under an all-risk property insurance policy. [1]

Damage 130