قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / Insurance / A video explaining the burden imposed on a first party insured property insurance

A video explaining the burden imposed on a first party insured property insurance



Watch the full video at https://rumble.com/vf9fpl-a-video-explaining-the-burden-imposed-on-a-first-party-property-insurance-i.html? It's the insured's duty to prove that property has been physically damaged. The loss of marketability is not a risk insured under a property policy. only physical damage to property is insured.

I Lundstrom v United Servs. Car. Ass & # 39; n-CIC, 192 SW3d 78 (Tex. App. 2006), a case involving a leaking water pipe, the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld the District Court of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and found that a leaking water pipe could lead to loss of personal property. [ Gatti v Hannover Insurance Company 774 F. 2d 1151 (1985).] One of the insured's employees noticed that the ground was saturated with water and that the water meter was spinning fast. This led to the conclusion that the water from the underground pipe leaked after passing through the water meter. Confirmation of this conclusion came in the form of a water bill for $ 39,523.45. The insured claimed that all the risk policy would cover this cost, but the insurer disagreed and claimed that this was a financial loss that was different from a physical loss of property. ignored the common sense meaning of the phrase "physical loss." “The water became the property of the insured when it passed through the water meter, and therefore the subsequent discharge of water was a physical loss of the insured's personal property – the water.

Coverage was denied to an insured in Chadwick v. Aetna Insurance Company 9 NC App. 446, 176 S.E. 2d 352 (1970), when evidence tended to show that jewelry was stolen from a jeweler by an unidentified man and woman who pretended to be customers of the plaintiff's jewelry store. The loss was discovered during a "spot check" of the inventory about nine days after the alleged theft. The Chadwick court found that the facts of the case did not justify recovery and ordered a new trial, noting that the language of politics clearly "bore [s] recovery for unexplained losses or for mysterious disappearances, however they come to light. ”


© 2021 – Barry Zalma

Barry Zalma, Esq., CFE, now limits his practice to employment as an insurance consultant specializing in insurance coverage, insurance claims management, insurance operations and insurance fraud almost as insurance

. He also acts as an arbitrator or mediator for insurance-related disputes. He practiced law in California for more than 44 years as an insurance coverage and claims lawyer and more than 52 years in the insurance industry. He is available at http://www.zalma.com and zalma@zalma.com.

Mr. Zalma is the first recipient of the first annual Claims Magazine / ACE Legend Award.

For the past 53 years, Barry Zalma has devoted his life to insurance, insurance claims and the need to defeat insurance fraud. He has created the following library of books and other materials to enable insurers and their claims staff to become professionals in insurance claims.

Go to the podcast Zalma On Insurance at https://anchor.fm/barry-zalma; Follow Zalma on Twitter at https://twitter.com/bzalma ; Go to Barry Zalma videos on Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/c/c-262921; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg; Go to the library for insurance claims – https://zalma.com/blog/insurance-claims- [195659013] bibliotek / Read posts from Barry Zalma at https://parler.com/profile / Hymn / post; and Read the last two issues of ZIFL here.


Source link