Our friend Jeff i G sent along the link to this sad story:
"Owners inward add-on to renters inwards North Carolina say they were left inwards the nighttime subsequently a beach condominium community all of a abrupt close down. The condos were condemned Friday, subsequently an applied scientific bailiwick report works life that the belongings has dangerous structural issues."
It's not clear whether the owners testament locomote allowed to yell upward their personal property.
Okay Henry, that is a sad story, but what's the insurance angle?
Well, Jeff asked if the owners' condo policies would comprehend this situation. As park inwards these cases, I turned to our expert friend (and P&C guru) Bill M. Now choke along inwards take away heed that his answers are specific to Ohio, but that it's in all likelihood that they'd also apply inwards other states.
Basically, the owners are out of luck.
Now, why is that?
Well, Bill taught me a new phrase, inward add-on to suggested I utilization it whenever I'm looking at these kinds of (potential) claims: "cause of loss." That is, which circumstances are specifically covered, inward add-on to which are specifically excluded.
So here's the relevant exclusion:
"Owners inward add-on to renters inwards North Carolina say they were left inwards the nighttime subsequently a beach condominium community all of a abrupt close down. The condos were condemned Friday, subsequently an applied scientific bailiwick report works life that the belongings has dangerous structural issues."
It's not clear whether the owners testament locomote allowed to yell upward their personal property.
Okay Henry, that is a sad story, but what's the insurance angle?
Well, Jeff asked if the owners' condo policies would comprehend this situation. As park inwards these cases, I turned to our expert friend (and P&C guru) Bill M. Now choke along inwards take away heed that his answers are specific to Ohio, but that it's in all likelihood that they'd also apply inwards other states.
Basically, the owners are out of luck.
Now, why is that?
Well, Bill taught me a new phrase, inward add-on to suggested I utilization it whenever I'm looking at these kinds of (potential) claims: "cause of loss." That is, which circumstances are specifically covered, inward add-on to which are specifically excluded.
So here's the relevant exclusion:
(4) (a) have on inward add-on to tear, marring, scratching or deterioration; (emphasis added)
So the "cause of loss" is specifically excluded. Which is a double whammy: the possessor instantly off has no trouble solid to live, but the banking trouble concern yet wants their mortgage paid off, inward add-on to there's not going to locomote a banking trouble concern fit from the insurance society to pay off the old place, or pay for a new one.
But what nearly their personal belongings (clothes, appliances, furniture, etc)? Well, they're in all likelihood outta luck there, too:
But what nearly their personal belongings (clothes, appliances, furniture, etc)? Well, they're in all likelihood outta luck there, too:
(1) Enforcement of whatever ordinance or police pull draw regulating the construction, repair or demolition of a building or other structure, unless specifically provided under this policy
The "cause of loss" hither would locomote the regime forbidding the owners to yell upward their belongings. So again, no insurance to pay for replacing them.
Yikes.
Yikes.
