![]() ![]() ![]() American Integrity Insurance Company of Florida, 1 an appellate court was faced with a similar situation, leakage of a refrigerator line over a prolonged period of time, resulted in a loss. ![]() However, the insurance company failed to apply that same strict reading to damage caused in the first thirteen days. Clearly, the insurance company was attempting to apply a strict reading of the policy language, refusing to cover damage that occurred over a period of weeks. The insurance company denied the claim citing the water damage exclusion noted above. The damage to the home was significant, but the insured did not discover the line burst until more than fourteen days after the line burst. We recently reviewed a matter where a water line to a refrigerator burst in a vacation home, discharging an estimated 1,000 gallons of water per day. But what happens when you have a situation where there is significant water damage caused in the first thirteen days? Aren’t coverage clauses interpreted broadly so as to afford the greatest protection to the insured, while exclusion clauses interpreted narrowly? Many of the homeowner policies we review exclude water damage resulting from, “continuous or repeated seepage or leakage of water or stream, or the presence of condensation of humidity, moisture or vapor which occurs over a period of weeks, months or years.” Courts have interpreted this clause to exclude water damage that occurs over 14 days. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |