ACV VS. replacement cost VS. reimbursement cost

by Guest » Tue May 22, 2012 04:41 am
Guest

Homeowners policy examples both with HO3;

One policies' dec page includes an endorsement with replacement cost (with ACV outlined in bold in the policy.)

Policy 2 states that it is a reimbursement policy for both Coverage A and C

upon a partial peril loss of over 200K where the structure needs to be repaired not replaced... and personal content loss of over 120K

According to your previous comments, both policies would act the same as the reimbursement policy.

My position is that if you have a replacement policy, you should be given a check for the full value of its replacement, not a partial check, then reimbursed when you get the dwelling fixed (or not) and coverage c assets repurchased.

What is your take on this?
Property, casualty life disability licensed agent in WA state

Total Comments: 2

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 09:38 pm Post Subject: Policy of indemnification

The HO policy is one of indemnification. That is the insured is to be made whole under the terms and conditions of the policy, not underpaid nor overpaid. As you are probably well aware, repair costs are all over the board. For instance the insuror pays based on the adjuster's estimate less depreciation and $1,000 deducitble in the amount of $10,000 with a holdback of depreciation in the amount of $3,000 The insured gets the work done for $11,000. Is it right for the insured to get $13,000 when it cost only $11,000? The insured has actually been fully indemnified with the $10,000 payment. Anything over that and the insured actually pockets money and my premiums and yours go up.

Posted: Thu Aug 09, 2012 07:42 pm Post Subject: auto

acv versus replacement cost-in MS is it always ACV for auto damages.

Add your comment

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.