If my wife and I are both listed as named insured on a homeowner policy. Does it make any differance if in the named insured portion of the policy the words and or are included?
Total Comments: 2
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2012 04:14 am Post Subject:
It does make a difference... as those words mean different things. If I have an apple _or_ orange is different then if I have an apple _and_ orange.
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2012 04:39 am Post Subject:
I think the OP may be asking about "and" or "or" in regard to the named insureds -- as in a policy provision that address the "first named insured." The courts are increasingly overturning contract language that points to only one of the multiple named insureds.
As in a case where the second named insured in a homeowners policy contacted the insurance company to make a change that the first named insured did not want, and without his knowledge or consent. When a claim resulted that would have been covered were it not for the change that was made, the first named insured sued the insurance company.
The insurance company won the case, with the court upholding the right of any named insured to make policy changes unilaterally, even though the contract stated only the first named insured had that right. The insurance company actually argued that the provision was meaningless, and the court agreed.
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2012 04:14 am Post Subject:
It does make a difference... as those words mean different things. If I have an apple _or_ orange is different then if I have an apple _and_ orange.
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2012 04:39 am Post Subject:
I think the OP may be asking about "and" or "or" in regard to the named insureds -- as in a policy provision that address the "first named insured." The courts are increasingly overturning contract language that points to only one of the multiple named insureds.
As in a case where the second named insured in a homeowners policy contacted the insurance company to make a change that the first named insured did not want, and without his knowledge or consent. When a claim resulted that would have been covered were it not for the change that was made, the first named insured sued the insurance company.
The insurance company won the case, with the court upholding the right of any named insured to make policy changes unilaterally, even though the contract stated only the first named insured had that right. The insurance company actually argued that the provision was meaningless, and the court agreed.
Add your comment