Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 3:06 pm Post subject: A question of liability
I've got one for Lori or another claims professional.
If a house burns down and it's concluded that the homeowner was not guilty of arson, how can that homeowner (or his carrier) be liable for damage to a neighbor's property (a boat) caused by the fire?
Does the neighbor's insurer really have a right to subrogate on this?
Do they have a right to subgrogate? Sure... people can ask for anything they want. Will the homeowner be required to pay? Not unless they were liable.
But being liable does not mean the person needs to be guilty of arson. If I knew an appliance was going bad, could result in a fire and I chose to do nothing about it, I'd not be guilty of arson but it could be argued that I was legally liable for the damages caused to someone else's property from the fire.
Thanks Tcope.
I'll have to ask claims if the cause of the fire was determined and if so what it was. They paid it without question so I assumed they didn't suspect the insured of any involvment arson or otherwise and at this point they haven't paid anything on the subrogation claim just set a reserve.
The guy who's house burned would've had to have been negligent...in some way I would think....Unless in this case the poor neighbor just had his boat on him own property and the fire was so far reaching that it got to his boat (probably a fiberglass one and it melted right?)...In that case it just might be covered...because your insured's ''problem'' (fire) went to anothers property...however what if the fire ran and burned down the entire neighborhood...???? He would'nt have been held liable for that....interesting question...let us know the outcome... _________________ Have you been helped by a poster? Do you want to show your appreciation? YOU CAN !! Just simply click on the donate button and send them some coin!
My neighbor had something similar happen regarding smoke damage to his home from a fire next door and the insurance of the homeowner who had the fire paid for the smoke damage.
Interesting point though about the entire neighborhood. I would think not but why stop at the first house. This is going to be very interesting.
Update.
Our company won the arbitration because the boat's insurer was not able to produce evidence of negligence on the part of our insured
That was our stance as well right? Good...
Quote:
However, now the boat's owner is filing private suit. Not sure why he thinks his Lawyer will be better than his insurance company's but we shall see.
That's a joke... poor boat owner (IMO) is just digging that (financial) hole deeper and deeper.. _________________ Have you been helped by a poster? Do you want to show your appreciation? YOU CAN !! Just simply click on the donate button and send them some coin!
poor boat owner (IMO) is just digging that (financial) hole deeper and deeper..
