| Author |
Message |
LMUSHRED
| | Posted on Saturday, March 04, 2000 - 9:11 pm: | |
To No Pro:
If this is a condo association, the policy which
you are probably dealing with is a RCBAP.
This of course is if 75% of the building is
residential living space. If not then you are
dealing with a General Policy. Both of these policies have the sewer backup provision if the
insured meets the conditions of the policy.
Not just one of these have to be met but ALL four
the 4 are as follows:
1. There has to be a general condition of flooding in the area
2. Flood has to be the cause for the sewer backup
3. Te sewer backup must occur within 72 hrs of the flood receding
4. The building must be 80% insured to replacement cost
If they meet ALL of the conditions it can be considered but remember one additional piece of information. There is an additional amount
of $250 in addition to the deductible.
The definition of general condition of flooding was addressed in prior post and quite adequately so I won't address that.
In answer to your other question. If the fire hydrant is in the street and a car hits the hydrant and sheers it off and water runs down the street or from the street into the building then as defined in the policy that constitutes a general condition of flood. The water can come from any source as long as it either is more than one property or 2 or more acres
Hope this helps |
No Pro
| | Posted on Saturday, March 04, 2000 - 7:13 pm: | |
Smith, this loss was reported by the new association president who had little or no information on the loss. The agent assumed it was a flood loss which is how I got involved in the picture. Can anyone think of a situation where a supply line would be covered for example fire hydrant or main line rupture. Also on a differant not what would be the circumstances for a sewage back up to be covered under a flood policy?
Thanks |
R.D. Hood
| | Posted on Saturday, March 04, 2000 - 3:32 pm: | |
Dan,
Your statement that it MUST include two areas of land, is not entirely correct.
This provision appies when the flood is confined solely on one property. If, in fact, it includes two or more properties, including, but not limited to, a neighbor, a municipaly owned street, or any other it could be covered as a general condition of flooding.
The NFIP policy is the gospel for all flood losses as you are aware. Check article 3, C 2 of Losses Not Covered and Article 2-Definitions "Flood" A 2 of the dwelling policy |
TheFloodGuy
| | Posted on Saturday, March 04, 2000 - 3:30 pm: | |
If the escaping water inundated two adjacent properties with standing water we would have a "general condition of flooding" and a valid flood claim. If the individual building and adjacent grounds covered 2 acres or more and all of the area was unundated (i.e. standing water) we would also have a valid flood loss. Flood waters can originate from any source but the "general condition of flooding" threshold must be met before a valid flood loss occurs. Sounds to me like a job for condo association's policy - not flood. |
B. Stovall
| | Posted on Saturday, March 04, 2000 - 2:48 pm: | |
Sounds to me like someone had a named peril policy and "discharge from a plumbing system" was not one of the perils in the policy so we have a "wannabe" flood. Probably turned in that way by the agent trying to mollify a customer. |
smith
| | Posted on Saturday, March 04, 2000 - 11:55 am: | |
no-pro- just out of curiosity, how did that claim even come to be set up as a flood loss? |
Dan Stelly
| | Posted on Saturday, March 04, 2000 - 11:43 am: | |
In addition to it being a General condition of flooding, it MUST also involve 2 or more acres of land. |
R.D. Hood
| | Posted on Saturday, March 04, 2000 - 10:06 am: | |
The responses to your querry are 100% correct. Read the flood policy, and it specifically states the causes of loss and the origins.
Your loss is the "sudden bursting or tearing asunder of a water carring vessel" and should be a covered peril, all things being equal.
If, the loss was turned in as a flood loss, that is erroneous.IMHO |
storm pro
| | Posted on Saturday, March 04, 2000 - 9:47 am: | |
I agree with old timer. This is a discharge from a plumbing system - NOT a flood loss. Let me give you another example.
I used to work for Nationwide and they considered a backed up downspout that overflowed into a basement a covered loss and not surface water.
The downspout being the plumbing system. |
old timer
| | Posted on Saturday, March 04, 2000 - 9:21 am: | |
It is not a "flood loss" from a "general condition of flooding" but simply an accidental rupture to a pipe loss. |
no-pro
| | Posted on Saturday, March 04, 2000 - 9:15 am: | |
I recently recieved a flood loss. I have a large condominium where a pvc water supply for the water tower A/C line bursted flooding 2 floors. Would you consider this a flood loss. Would appreciate any additional suggestions. |
|
