The CGL policy has several exclusions that apply to faulty workmanship. However, a number of courts have ruled that these exclusions are meaningless because damage to your own work (even if caused by a subcontractor) is not an “occurrence,” so the insuring agreement isn’t even triggered. We are now seeing legislation and CGL endorsements in…
There has been an increasingly disturbing trend of courts upholding claim denials based on property damage not arising from an “occurrence” in the CGL policy. Typically, these claims involve contractors and damage to “your work.” While I’m not saying the claims are covered, I do question whether the “no occurrence” basis for the denial is…
The named insured is a corporation. The sole stockholder personally owns a piece of land on which the corporation parks its vehicles. A pedestrian tripped on the premises and is suing the insured corporation. The location of this land was not specifically scheduled as a location on the policy. The insurer of seven years is…
A restaurant was insured under a CGL with the CG 24 07 attached. A customer broke a crown eating a BBQ sandwich. The adjuster denied the $285 medical payments claim due to the CG 24 07. Subsequently, they denied the liability claim on the basis that, once the product has been turned over to the…
Recently our “Ask an Expert” service received two questions from agents in different states who had experienced the same claim. A restaurant customer broke a tooth on an olive pit in a salad and the restaurant’s insurer denied liability. Read the full article to get our slant on this denial, as well as learn something…
If you recall the old Flip Wilson TV show, he had a recurring sketch with the theme “The devil made me do it!” In the routine, his alter-ego, Geraldine, would get into trouble, then disclaim responsibility, blaming it on the devil. Too often, this happens in our business when liability is denied by the carrier.…
One of the most often misunderstood insurance issues involves what event triggers coverage under a liability policy? Is it when the negligence occurs or when, possibly years later, the BI or PD occurs? Is there a difference in the coverage trigger between an occurrence and a claims-made policy? How does this issue affect discontinued operations…
In 1999, ISO, following the lead of a number of companies, introduced a series of new and revised “Montrose” endorsements for the CGL program. This filing was prompted by a California Supreme Court decision, Montrose Chemical Corp. v. Admiral Ins. Co., that adopted the “continuous trigger” of coverage under third-party liability claims and abdicated the…
The insured negligently caused a fire to his own rented area. It was paid under the landlord’s property policy and now they are subrogating against the insured tenant. The insured’s carrier is saying that, even though “fire legal” is part of the CGL policy (now referred to in the CGL forms as “Damage to Premises…
