Forums

The last "alien" I had was discovering that flooding was covered on manufactured home policies in Florida. Go figure.

 Flood Is covered in Texas and most other states under the  auto forms but not the fire forms.

When working commercial loss the  The CP 10 65 10 00 makes an adjusters eys light up as it cover "flood" by the broad definitions and also covers" surface waters". Which the NFIP policy does not( has to be two properties)

Just had a loss this week under the CP 10,30 and vehicle damage to "shrubs" are not part of the  e." Outdoor Property" {extensions}

(The older you get the less you are inclined to memorize coverage). Before each loss I get on commercial coverage on the fire forms or the inland marine forms. I read all the coverage before I inspect the loss

These type of topics are what the old timers have been doing since I started. Since the post war days of the 40's and 50,s when the "risk of loss" coverage started and many many properties were "under insured to value and most certainly under insured to replacement cost. The underwriters understood the reasoning for the "condition" and realized to generate more income for the paper contract (policy) the agents could use the claim deparments as a sales tool. How, enforce the  co insurance with their insureds on small losses and by applying deductibles on all losses large and small.

The biggest boon to the property insurance industry was the introduction of the "package policy" of 1958 in homeowners and tenants, which became the present Homeowners predominate coverage in about 1960. The policy required that coverage A, Building be insured to 80% of replacement cost of rebuilding the dwelling or the policy could not be purchased. This resulted in fire insurance going from 25, 35 and 50% of a foreseeable loss to 100%. The other perils had to be equal to the fire. The additional losses to outdoor property was also a selling tool.This was really the birth of RCC coverage as we know it today.

The duties of an adjuster having to computate the unearned premium resulting in a pro rata return, the reinstatment of the face amount of the policy or the reduction of the face amount almost never has to addressed in the 21st century. This may arrise in the California fires and you folks should be aware of this provision. Most of this is done by the carriers agent today, but it will come up. The adjusters working these losses will get several years excellant experience in crammed into one or two years.

Reguarding an HO policy on non existant property destroyed by fire. I think the best way to explain would have the insured return the policy for a full refund of all non earned premium on a pro rata basis. Also replace with a Renters Policy with the same carrier at a differant address. This should close all the gaps and provide liability at the lot while the future use is being sorted out.