| Author |
Message |
Ghostbuster (Ghostbuster)
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 25, 2001 - 11:04 am: | |
Surprisingly, my dreams of Bora-Bora involved 400lb ladies in grass skirts standing behind their cannibal Daddies. Even more disturbing was the fact that they all wanted to toast my tokus over a less than romantic fire.
Permit me to be somewhat maudlin and reflective for a moment. We storm troopers tend to be somewhat solitary souls. Unlike normal people with regular jobs and daily contact with the same people, we work and have social contact with our peers on an irregular basis. In reality, the most familar faces we see each day are our Weather Channel pals. We've been thru more pregnancies with our Weather Channel girlfriends than you can shake a stick at.
What my psyche has found here is a sense of at- one-ness and acceptance as one of the gang. We all grew up watching the 'Our Gang' comedies on TV that were made in the 1930's. On American Movie Classics on cable, they are showing them twice a day. If you watch them, please note the strong sense of belonging and compare it to the atmosphere here in Roy's little clubhouse. It is one and the same.
Each of us plays a role. Each of us are part of something greater than ourselves, both here and out in the field. We are unique, collectively and individually. To be accepted to play in this sandbox with the other kids means a lot to me. Thank you. |
Cecelia
| | Posted on Monday, September 24, 2001 - 11:11 pm: | |
GB,
My mama always taught me to keep my mouth shut if I had nothing to say. Listen and learn. Ask questions when you think you've learned enough to ask.
This certainly IS a discussion for the few and the proud.
I'm silently reading from the sidelines. |
Jim Flynt (Jimflynt)
| | Posted on Monday, September 24, 2001 - 10:42 pm: | |
Aha, the Dream Meister returns. Ghostbuster Mi Amigo, you finally awoke from your lustful dreams of luscious lovely ladies on Bora Bora beaches to return to reclaim your hall monitor position. You see how badly we missed you heh?
I figured that Leonard's had opened a new 4 hour course somewhere down there around the Alamo, entitled "How To Adjust Multi-Million Dollar World Trade Center Business Interruption Claims When You're Not Kicking Tires or Pumping Gas" and that everyone who was here was banging on the doors to get in down there before they filled the last slot in the class. I can't vie with that kind of competition.
Or everyone heard about Russ Lott making a new batch of homebrew and they're headed to Iowa for liquid refreshment happy hour. (Russ says it is always 5 O'Clock somewhere in the world, but amazingly enough, it always seems to me to be wherever Russ is stationed with his brewery).
In the meantime, my sources tell me those little bitty claims aren't materializing or coming in up there in Yankee Land (a/k/a The Big A) but they sure are getting tons and tons and lots and lots of multi-million dollar claims. GAB is even bringing in their GA's and EGA's from England, Ireland, and Australia as well as from all over the Good Ol' US of A, so we'uns can all take a well deserved break from this busy year and get rested up for ice storms this winter in Quebec while the au pair girls help us work on our French lessons. Shoot, some of the other big boys like Crawford and Lindsey are liable to get the same idea. You know how these copycat things go.
Well, since you are back on the job as hall monitor par excellence and commercial adjuster extraordinaire, and I am no longer needed here for the time being, I think I'll close my eyes and try to find 'your' beach in Bora Bora with those bounteous babes wearing those sensuous skimpy slinky hula hula skirts,,,,,,,
Now I wonder if they'll welcome me with a nicer lei than they presented you? |
Ghostbuster (Ghostbuster)
| | Posted on Monday, September 24, 2001 - 4:05 pm: | |
Pssst! Hey, Jim...
...why is it so quiet in here? Other than you and Clayton, Horace and Mark, where are the other interested parties that could put their two centavos into the pot? Could it be that this line of conversation is over the heads of many of the guys and gals in this playhouse? Is this a topic for the few, the proud, the Commercial Adjusters? Why don't they come and play in our sand box? |
Jim Flynt (Jimflynt)
| | Posted on Monday, September 24, 2001 - 8:41 am: | |
Horace, thanks for your comments and analysis.
It might benefit our CADO readers if you would show how a 'couple of those new wrinkles' would change the coverage outcome in the Uptown example.
That is what I am hoping for here, that readers will show how minor variations in the hypotheticals can significantly change the end result. |
Horace Smith
| | Posted on Monday, September 24, 2001 - 6:51 am: | |
UPTOWN TRADING COMPANY
In your example the business was not closed by the "Action of Civil Authorities". I see no way under your scenario that there would be a valid BI claim.
However, in the real world, during the first few days following the loss, Authorities prohibited access (except for emergency workers, government and media} south of 14th street. 14th Street is quite a bit further from ground hero than 14 blocks. Later, I believe the Authorities reduced the closed zone and drew the line at Canal Street.
In the area where access was denied by Civil Authorities, an off premises covered peril must be the reason for the Authorities action. Take your pick: aircraft, fire, explosion, falling objects or in the understatement of the year: vandalism.
This "Civil Authorities" coverage is very similar to the "Civil Authorities" coverage under Additional Living Expense of Dwelling policies. The Insured of course is not claiming business income under his HO but rather his necessary cost in living expenses. The Tribeca neighborhood just north of the WTC area has quite a few residences and many of those people will have homweowners claims under the "civil authorities" feature of the ADL.
With regard to your Uptown Trading example, I don't believe there is a valid BI claim, but I am not crazy about hypotheticals. It seems that when you are presented with a real claim there are usually a couple of different wrinkles that can change the result. And Jim, any New Yorker will tell you that 14 blocks from the WTC is not considered "uptown". By the way, I will be off on a trip for three days so this will be my parting shot on these boards for now. Cheers. |
Clayton Carr
| | Posted on Sunday, September 23, 2001 - 1:05 pm: | |
Re: Uptown Trading Company - the coverage that was presented to me when the claim was assigned is a State farm BP - Special Form 3 (FP-6103) (5/89), with no added endorsements. Section I is Property Coverages, and Coverage C (of Sect I) is Loss of Income.
Under this Section C, LOI, the policy says it will pay for actual loss of income .... due to necessary suspension .... the suspension must be caused by ACCIDENTAL DIRECT PHYSICAL LOSS TO THE PROPERTY AT THE DESCRIBED PREMISES .... caused by an insured loss.
I refer to this type of policy as a "named perils" policy, but I see the term used is "Specified Causes of Loss".
As the "claim file notes" indicate, the cause of the cessation of business is not a direct physical loss caused by an insured loss.
Unfortunately, with the coverages available as noted above, I would have to explain to the insured that this policy could not respond to their Loss of Income. |
Jim Flynt (Jimflynt)
| | Posted on Sunday, September 23, 2001 - 12:08 pm: | |
BI Case Study #1:
Ok Horace, here's the first scenario for your consideration and that of CADO readers interested in WTC claims handling.
Uptown Trading Company suffers no direct physical damage to their New York City (Manhattan) risk location 14 blocks from the World Trade Center collapse. Uptown's risk location is also leeward of smoke and smoke damage from the WTC.
Uptown further does not have any access denial for the streets adjacent and abutting their location.
However, since the 9/11/01 WTC collapse, Uptown Trading has not had electrical power, telephone or public water available and therefore has had to close it's doors and shut down it's operations.
Assuming either the BOP or any CPP coverage form, what if any coverage would Uptown Trading have for this loss of business interruption? (Please specify a specific form if you are arguing for any coverage). |
Jim Flynt (Jimflynt)
| | Posted on Sunday, September 23, 2001 - 11:02 am: | |
(NOTE: Here is Horace Smith's original post about business interruption insurance under the BOP policy which more appropriatelt belongs under this thread).
To politely interject:
There are tiers, levels, and rungs of business income and time element adjusting. Let's look at the lower levels.
The Business Owners Policy (BOP), written by many carriers and the similar Business Policies written by Big Red and others, are designed for small businesses from mom and pop up to small corporations. If the insured has purchased "loss of income" or "business income" under a BOP,the claims handling can be much simpler than under the Commercial Property (CP) forms.
Two reasons among several: (1) there is no coinsurance clause or requirement under a BOP and (2) there is no monthly limit such as under the CP earnings forms. These two items alone prevent many disagreements.
As with all BI policies there must be direct damage to the building or business personal property, from a covered peril, to trigger the BI coverages. Unless, that is, the claim is caused by "Action of Civil Authorities". In the latter case the direct damage from a covered peril must occur off the premises and the insured's recovery; business income, and extra expense,is limited to a period of two weeks.
There will be numerous unhappy insureds relative to this two week limit but I suspect FEMA and Rudy will bring additional relief.
An adjuster under a BOP still has to obtain or observe evidence determining the net income before and after the event and also determine continuing expenses. Good accounting principles are required, but
an attentive, bright, alert, claims person such as most of us can study and master the BOP policy in an evening.
I do not recommend attempting to adjust Morgan Stanley or businesses in the collapsed buildings, or anything even near ground hero. I'm saying there are thousands of small claims out on the periphery, under BOP and Business Policies that you would be reasonably comfortable with. |
Jim Flynt (Jimflynt)
| | Posted on Sunday, September 23, 2001 - 7:13 am: | |
I am starting this new thread to differentiate business interruption under the BOP (Businessowners Policy) from BIC coverage forms which are used with the CPP & BPP policies.
The intent of separating BOP Business Interruption claims handling through this new thread is to avoid adjusters becoming confused with two separate and slightly different coverages. |
|
