|  | | Author | Messages | |
Nathan West
Posts:13
 | | 12/21/2006 11:08 PM |
| | I have a question regarding the definition of the insured and under that definition who all is covered. I am doing Cov A on a large fire loss. Another adjuster is doing Cov C. In this scenario, the Named insured, his Mother, and his "partner", are living in the house. I know that the mother is covered, shes family. My question is, are the contents of the "partner" covered? He is not a relative, or a spouse, and he is not under the age of 18 and under the primary care of the insured. Please advise, Standard HO 3. | | | |
| Dave Marlin
CO
Posts:47
| | 12/22/2006 1:53 AM |
| Nathan,
Unless there is precedent in your state, based on the info provided, I do not believe that the "partner" would be considered an insured unless named on the policy. You may also want to read the policy to see if the "partner" can be considered a guest but, If he or she receives mail at the residence, that may not fly. The "partner" probably should have had his/her own renters policy. | | | |
| Ray Hall
Adjuster
Houston, TX
Posts:785
| | 12/22/2006 1:44 PM |
| I would disagree if I were the claim manager. This is a very common situation in millions of single family dwellings insured by a Homeowners. I know I have paid for hundreds simular claims in the past and have never been questioned. Of course both names would make it simple; however sometime the partners names change over the lifetime of one partner who may have purchased the house in one name only. I have never really been ask or questioned on live in's of the opposite sex, or the same sex. Call the claim manager and you will get an atta boy. | | | |
| Dave Marlin
CO
Posts:47
| | 12/22/2006 3:25 PM |
| Although the partner is not considered an "insured" under the policy, Ray is correct and payment can be made for the contents. In a standard ISO policy, under coverage C, the policy states; "After a loss and at your request, we will cover personal property owned by: a. Others while the property is on the part of the "residence premises" occupied by an "insured". Thus, for example, if the insured stores personal property of a friend on the residence premises, coverage may be requested by the named insured.
Now, the partner is still not considered an insured for other purposes in the policy. There is an endorsement one can get called Other Members of Your Household Endorsement (HO 04 58) which extends insured status to the person or person named. | | | |
| Ray Hall
Adjuster
Houston, TX
Posts:785
| | 12/23/2006 2:26 PM |
| How many of you have thought about who paid for O.J. Simpsons defense cost in the civil suit filed by the Goldmans after he was found not guility in the murder trial. Was it his Homeowners or his Umbrella Policy or both, or neither.? A clue: Jim Baker of Baker Botts was the lead defense attorney ! | | | |
| Nathan West
Posts:13
| | 12/23/2006 7:24 PM |
| | I have to agree with Ray and Dave at this point. It seems to be a fairly fine line though, or else why bother with defining the insured Although, once i presented the question to the senior claim rep, they were of the opposite opinion, and said the partners contents were not covered. Fortunately, there were only two pair of pants and two sweat shirts of the partner in the house. | | | |
| R Estes
Posts:36
| | 12/24/2006 2:09 AM |
| | The "PARTNERS" Contents ARE NOT COVERED In this Scenario! | |
R. Estes | |
| R Estes
Posts:36
| | 12/24/2006 2:11 AM |
| Posted By Ray Hall on 12/23/2006 2:26 PM How many of you have thought about who paid for O.J. Simpsons defense cost in the civil suit filed by the Goldmans after he was found not guility in the murder trial. Was it his Homeowners or his Umbrella Policy or both, or neither.? A clue: Jim Baker of Baker Botts was the lead defense attorney !
THE GOLDMANS PAID FOR IT!
| |
R. Estes | |
| Steve Ebner
Moderator
Lake Ariel, PA
Posts:314
| | 12/24/2006 10:17 AM |
| Though the partner does not qualify as an "insured" under the policy, the standard HO3 (4/91) policy does, in fact, cover contents belonging to the partner under this clause: "We cover personal property owned or used by an "insured" while it is anywhere in the world. At your request, we will cover personal property owned by: 1. Others while the property is on the part of the "residence premises" occupied by an "insured";" This would apply unless the partner pays rent to the insured. In this case the exclusion for property of roomers, boarders, and tenants would apply. Other considerations: Unless the partner was just picked up off the street and brought into the household yesterday, it is not believable that he only owns two pairs of pants and two sweatshirts. You have likely paid for several things belonging to the partner already. It can be assumed in most cases that the insured would request that the partner's belongings be covered. But, if this a potential problem, inform the insured of the policy provision above and ask him to put the rquest in writing. Includes it in your file and, since the senior claim rep seems to think there is no coverage, quote the policy provision in your report. | |
Steve Ebner
"With great power comes great responsibility." (Stanley Lieber, Amazing Fantasy # 15 August 1962) | |
| Dave Marlin
CO
Posts:47
| | 12/24/2006 1:57 PM |
| Steve,
Good point about the roommate exclusion. That's kind of what I was refering to in my first post about whether or not the partner received mail. If he/she is a resident, that exclusion may apply. If not a resident, then there probable is coverage as stated above. This is a perfect example of an adjuster asking the right questions so proper coverage can be determined and the claim adjusted correctly.
I'll throw something else into the mix. What if the partner has his/her own residence and own insurance policy? Now we have another policy that covers the same property. Dependent on the type of property involved and limits, issues such as which is primary and apportionment may come into play. Something else to think about.
Dave | | | |
|
| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
| |
ActiveForums 3.7 |
| |
| |
| |
|
| | Adjuster Chat Room Activity | |
| |
| | |
|
|
| |
|