sponsored by
?4U ... Questions for You ...
?4U
Homeowners
with
Irene Morrill, CPCU, CIC, ARM, CRM, LIA, CRIS, CPIW
Vice President of Technical Affairs Massachusetts Association of Insurance Agents
One of my insureds opened his newly built in ground pool last week and noticed that he had some holes in the liner.
The appraisal company looked at the damages and said it was from a raccoon.
The appraiser also told my insured that this was a good thing since a raccoon is a mammal, and
therefore would be covered (which sounds crazy
The adjuster at the insurance company (Safety Insurance), contacted our insured and told him a raccoon is considered vermin and therefore would not be covered. Is this correct?
I find it hard to believe that there is no way to have coverage in the event that an animal does damage to your swimming pool liner?
Vermin …what is it
When I spoke with the insured he had looked around on-line and found a few cases where the insurance company was forced to pay for the damages since the term “vermin” is so broad. What do you think?
Only in Massachusetts is a raccoon vermin …thanks to a MA court case Hingham v. Reavey
I wonder how the judge did in science when back in school.
Under the HO-9 and HO-2000 filings the Coverage A/B exclusion for vermin is rewritten
Vermin …what is it
What does “vermin” mean …in ISO national policy it is NOT defined …so the dictionaries are used
noun, plural vermin.
1. noxious, objectionable, or disgusting animals
collectively, especially those of small size that appear commonly and are difficult to control, as flies, lice, bedbugs, cockroaches, mice, and rats.
2. an objectionable or obnoxious person, or such persons collectively.
3. animals that prey upon game, as coyotes or weasels.
Vermin …what is it
Vermin (colloquially varmint[1] or varmit) are pests or
nuisance animals, especially those that threaten human society by spreading diseases or destroying crops and livestock. Use of the term implies the need for
extermination programs. Since the term is defined in relation to human activities, which species are included vary from area to area and person to person.
Generally …”vermin” is not considered to be raccoons or skunks …but things like mice and smaller…
Unfortunately … due to the court case in MA we have an amendatory endorsement adding a definition of
“vermin” which is VERY comprehensive
Vermin …what is it
In MA … HO-91 and HO-2000 re-defines “vermin” to include raccoons, skunks, etc.
HO-2011 changes exclusion to the below:
Good news …vermin removed
Bad news … add exclusion for nesting/infestation and discharge/release of waste products/secretions
So no skunk secretion …possibly raccoon damage
Vermin …what is it
Host liquor coverage …or not
I have an insured who is currently insured with MPIUA – HO3, who is going to be having a wedding on their premises and is concerned about coverage.
I did call MPIUA but was unable to get a straight
Host liquor coverage …or not
Would you be able to tell me if there would be coverage afforded under their Homeowners policy (form is 10/00) for such an event?
Host liquor coverage …or not
First … drinking and getting injured on the premises … Covered under HO policy?
If a guest drinks too much and injures him/herself by falling down the stairs or falling while walking home and sues me, will my HO policy respond?
It’s an open bar
They pay for their drinks
Host liquor coverage …or not
There is NO host liquor exclusion in the
HO-2000/2011 or the HO-91 policy.
This is the HO-2000/2011 language but HO-91 similar
This says coverage for : direct actions
vicarious liability and/or negligent supervision contractual liability and/or assumption
Host liquor coverage …or not
If there is no exclusion, then the HO policy will respond to BI and PD
arising when an “insured” is legally responsible.
As long as not selling liquor …not a problem … selling liquor could be a “business” and then you would be in trouble
Host liquor coverage …or not
HO-2000/2011 (HO-91 similar)
NO ISO HO edition has any
reference to alcohol
And therefore …no exclusion
If a guest drinks too much, drives his/her car home and on the way injures
him/herself or someone else and I get sued, will my HO policy respond?
It’s an open bar
They pay for their drinks
Host liquor coverage …or not
The HO 2000/HO-2011 edition could be a problem
If guests drink too much and DRIVE and cause injury to themselves or others the
HO-2000/HO-2011 “motor vehicle liability definition” and corresponding Coverage E/F exclusion could preclude coverage
The HO-2000/HO-2011 definition of motor vehicle applies to ANY motor vehicle owned or used by ANYONE.
Host liquor coverage …or not
The HO-2000/HO-2011 motor vehicle Exclusion excludes the definition … Host liquor coverage …or not
MA court case in 2011 with Fairplan and
the ISO HO-2000 denied auto related host liquor coverage under the HO policy
Host liquor coverage …or not
Possible solution to lack of host liquor coverage in HO-2000/
HO-2011 edition?
Buy one-day event policy
Look to MAP and cross your fingers
The HO –91 edition – same answers as to the non-driving question
No host liquor exclusion No business activity
No exclusion = COVERAGE!!!!! Host liquor coverage …or not
The HO –91 edition – motor vehicle exclusion only applies to a vehicle OWNED by; rented to; loaned to; operated by an “insured”
What if my insured borrows or rents a moped,
On vacation … in Bermuda?
Renting a moped in Bermuda …or not
Don’t count on HO coverage … for BI/PD
or
damage TO it …
under the HO-91, HO-2000 or HO-2011
All of these vehicles are designed for ON road use … So … the HO-91 won’t be applicable for BI/PD to others
Renting a moped in Bermuda …or not
HO-2000/HO-2011 states no coverage for anything subject to registration on public roads OR
And like the HO-91 would the HO-2000 and HO-2011 ONLY provide coverage for certain recreational vehicles designed for OFF road use ….
Renting a moped in Bermuda …or not
There will be NO Section II
Additional Coverage for damage TO any of the rented moped…
The HO-91 only provides section II additional coverage for Damage to property in one’s care of the vehicle is designed for off road use.
Renting a moped in Bermuda …or not
And …
ditto for the HO-2000 and HO-2011…
PS…
No Coverage C
for these motor vehicles under either the HO-91 or HO-2000/2011… as not designed for off-road use
Renting a moped in Bermuda …or not
NO Coverage C 4. Property Not Covered
We do not cover:
c. "Motor vehicles". ….
(2) We do cover "motor vehicles" not required to be
registered for use on public roads or property which are:
(a) Used solely to service an "insured's" residence; or
(b) Designed to assist the handicapped;
Renting a Segway on vacation
My insured came into the office and was telling me what they had done on vacation. They mentioned renting segways and going on a Segway excursion … Nothing happened …but if it had … what would their HO policy do?
Renting a Segway on vacation
The Segway PT is a two-wheeled, self-balancing, battery-powered electric vehicle invented by Dean Kamen. It is produced by Segway Inc. of New Hampshire, USA. The name Segway is derived from the word segue, meaning
smooth transition. PT is an abbreviation for personal transporter.
Renting a Segway on vacation
HO-91
Segway is designed for off road use as it is battery operated.
Under the HO-91 policy could provide coverage for BI and PD to others as it is NOT SUBJECT TO
MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION!!!
The need for motor vehicle registration could vary
The damage TO the Segway is excluded under the Coverage E limit by the C/C/C exclusion in the policy in the HO-91
However, under the Additional coverages section of Section II in the HO-91 policy there could be $500 maximum for the replacement value of loss to property of others “caused” by an insured
Renting a Segway on vacation
HO-91
There would be NO HO-91 Section I Contents coverage due to the exclusion for motor vehicles found under Coverage C
Property Not Covered. We do not cover:
3.Motor vehicles or all other motorized land conveyances. This includes:
b.Electronic apparatus …..
We do cover vehicles or conveyances not subject to motor
Would the answer be any different if they had been on vacation in St. Marten and caused a similar accident with a rented segway?
Renting a Segway on vacation
No,
the answer is the same because the HO policy provides world wide coverage under both
liability and contents.
The issues would still be the same.
Would any of the answers be different if Bud and Irene had the HO-2000 or HO-2011 instead of the HO-91?
Renting a Segway on vacation
The short answer is … no …
same answer for all questions…
1. "Aircraft Liability", "Hovercraft Liability", "Motor Vehicle Liability" and "Watercraft Liability", subject to the provisions in b.below, mean the following:
a.Liability for "bodily injury" or "property damage" arising out of the:
(1) Ownership of such vehicle or craft by an "insured";
(2) Maintenance, occupancy, operation, use, loading or unloading of such vehicle or craft by any person;
(3) Entrustment of such vehicle or craft by an "insured" to any person;
(4) Failure to supervise or negligent supervision of any person involving such vehicle or craft by an "insured"; or
(5) Vicarious liability, whether or not imposed by law, for the actions of a child or minor involving such vehicle or craft.
Additional definitions added to HO 2000 and HO-2011
Renting a Segway on vacation
7. "Motor vehicle" means:
a. A self-propelled land or amphibious vehicle; or
b. Any trailer or semitrailer which is being carried on, towed by or hitched for towing by a vehicle
described in a. above.
Additional definitions added to HO 2000/HO-2011
SECTION II – EXCLUSIONS A. "Motor Vehicle Liability"
1. Coverages E and F do not apply to any "motor vehicle liability" if, at the time and place of an "occurrence", the involved "motor vehicle":
a. Is registered for use on public roads or property;
b. Is not registered for use on public roads or property, but such registration is required by a law, or regulation
issued by a government agency, for it to be used at the place of the "occurrence"; or…
That very broad definition … is ….excluded!
Renting a Segway on vacation HO 2000/HO-2011
SECTION II – EXCLUSIONS A. "Motor Vehicle Liability" ….
2. If Exclusion A.1. does not apply, there is still no coverage for "motor vehicle liability" unless the "motor vehicle" is:
….. …..
d. Designed for recreational use off public roads and:
(1) Not owned by an "insured"; or
HO-2000 and HO-2011… Pays the additional coverage limit of $1000 to rented Segway if damaged
Renting a Segway on vacation HO 2000/HO-2011
NO Coverage C 4. Property Not Covered
We do not cover:
c. "Motor vehicles". ….
(2) We do cover "motor vehicles" not required to be
registered for use on public roads or property which are:
If your client rented an ATV or dirt bike OR A GOLFCART …
same discussion as Segway as these are designed for off road use
Renting a Segway on vacation
We have several clients who live on the water. They have docks for their own boats.
I assume there is liability coverage if someone is injured on their doc if they are on it with the insured permission. W
Does that constitute some sort of business pursuit?
Would the policy need to be endorsed? Should they obtain a commercial policy to be safe?
Can you let me know your thoughts?
Docks and the HO policy
It makes sense to me the ISO HO definition of "insured location" should consider a dock an insured location .... either "premises" used in connection with my residence ...or that
premises occasionally rented for non-business use.
Docks and the HO policy
All HO editions have the same definition of “insured location” Is it a “premises used by you in connection with your residence premises”?
Docks and the HO policy What is a “premises” Here are two definitions:
A. Black's Law (9th): "The part of a deed that describes the land being conveyed... A house or building, along with its grounds."
B. Merriam-Webster: "A tract of land with the buildings thereon; a building or part of a building usually with its appurtenances (as grounds)."
Docks and the HO policy What is a “premises”
If the dock is attached to the insured’s residence premises …then it should fit the definition.
A little email with underwriter …or on deck page … adding the discussion could help
Docks and the HO policy
f the dock is not attached to
residence premises … then one could have a problem with “insured
ocation” definition …and then I
WOULD definitely want it mentioned on policy declarations page
If it is rented to OTHERS ..that becomes a business and then there is DEFINITELY no coverage ...
And … would a carrier add an endorsement? If its ON the residence premises … HO 04 42 Incidental Occupancies could help …but IS it
My largest client who just bought his family’s home in Squantum. Oooh how the rich
live. Gorgeous waterfront property insured with MPIUA.
He received a permit to build a
Dock/float. From there spend $200,000 in construction fees to complete this pier.
Docks and the HO policy
My initial thoughts are that he would have only “broad form” perils available and to increase Part B to $200,000? If someone were to run into from the water at night and leave the scene I
guess he’s on his own?
The ISO HO policies only cover other structures ON the residence premises … is a dock
completely on the premises?
Is a float …an other structure off premises …or contents … that I would ask my carrier.
Docks and the HO policy
If dock is an other structure it has open perils coverage subject to ACV loss payment …
and might need the HO 04 92 Specified Other Structure off the residence premises
Docks and the HO policy
For other structure OFF the residence premises Need this endorsement to buy coverage
If contents it receives named perils …unless change to open perils …
and if replacement cost endorsement added to policy …that is good …
Is a “standard above ground 4 ft deep” large swimming pool considered “personal property” under contents coverage?
Swimming pools and the HO policy
It depends.
Some companies say Contents as can take it down and move it
Others say other structure as needs pump,
electricity …ask the particular company … ask ALL your companies …
If it is other structure …good news under HO-3 get “open perils”
But … it is NOT a building and will only receive ACV loss settlement … under ANY edition of HO policy
Swimming pools and the HO policy
If it is considered Coverage C …
It gets named perils …but with the HO-5 one can have open perils on contents (Or under HO-91 the HO-3 plus HO 00 15 endorsement) Then . …since the HO 04 90 Replacement Cost
If the ice from the top of the pool covering falls into the pool and rips the liner is that a covered cause of loss?
Swimming pools and the HO policy
It depends on
1. whether company is “straight ISO” 2. Is this above ground or inground?
3. If above ground … does company see this as Coverage B or Coverage C
If 16 named perils for contents …
what caused “ice to fall” …falling ice …not named peril …
weight of ice and snow not covered unless contents inside
Swimming pools and the HO policy
If considered Coverage B … (or added open perils to contents - Some companies use the following ISO exclusion to deny coverage:
Swimming pools and the HO policy
If this is the exclusion I would argue “weight of SNOW caused loss … since that is NOT
excluded
Swimming pools and the HO policy
HO-2000/2011 HO-91
The insured's inground swimming pool liner has puckered areas, cracks, and tears. Per the insured's pool maintenance company, this was caused by the extremely cold winter - ground water froze and came into contact with the liner, causing the cracks and tears. It's an estimated $5k - $6k in damage.
Unfortunately … the same exclusions will probably be utilized to deny claim …
As well as
Swimming pools and the HO policy
I was searching the MAIA site for H04 contents stored in a storage unit and was getting error messages.
I am reading the policy and researching insured location and residence premises. It
I can ONLY speak to ISO policies
The ISO HO-91 and ISO HO-2000 give complete Coverage C limit to property off premises … including in storage. The only time in those policy editions when there is an overall
limitation of coverage is when property is usually located at ANOTHER insured’s
RESIDENCE …say a camp or second home.
Property in storage and the HO policy
Property in storage and the HO policy
HO-91 …only has overall limit of 10% ONLY if stuff is usually located at another insured’s residence … Stuff in storage is NOT limited
Property in storage and the HO policy
HO-2000 …only has overall limit of 10% ONLY if stuff is usually located at another insured’s residence …
Stuff in storage is NOT limited
In the ISO HO-2011 edition …which only one company that I know of uses … is there a SECOND overall 10% limitation … for Self-storage facilities …
If your company is not ISO …or “modifies” ISO language ..you would have to look at Coverage
HO-2011 has another overall 10% limitation for stuff at a
self-storage facility
Property in storage and the HO policy
HO 06 14 Increased Amount of Insurance For Personal Property Located in a Self-Storage Facility Endorsement is available
Should a self-storage facility be an “insured location” for liability … I believe that was ISO’s attention …otherwise …where you would find liability coverage.
It could be considered in ALL ISO editions:
Property in storage and the HO policy
But …
company interpretation sometimes puts a
“geographic limitation” … not that ISO does … I’d ask my HO carrier.