by Guest » Tue Jul 03, 2012 10:37 pm
Level of toxicity in my insured rental property is above the limit in which my state says is acceptable to human habitation. The damage was done by an invited guest of the leased tenant who was given domicile. The state required legal action to remove the guest from the home. During that time smoking or cooking of meth was done. The tested and validated toxicity indicates that meth may have only been cooked once or used infrequently. It registered a 1.5 on the scale used to rate it. A one would have been light use and acceptable to rent without cleaning.
The cleaning requires a professional fogging of the home and wiping of walls, ceilings, and all exposed furnishings. Someone with a medical condition that can not be exposed to chemicals may not tolerate even after a cleaning without a reaction. The cleaning is done by a licensed certified industrial company who is frequently used by police and sheriffs departments for major cleanups.
A call to the insurance agent and a request for coverage if a claim is submitted was made. The agent called the underwriter to get an opinion. He returned a call to me stating that all we could do was turn in a claim and see what they will do. I believe this is unacceptable in that there is no exclusion in the policy evidently and if so, I would have been told there was no coverage. It was suggested by the testing and cleaning company that it be turned in as a comprehensive claim as it was a willful act of vandalism of the property with a known chemical to be dangerous to humans.
If the claim is allowed, would the insurer be a permitted to subrogate a claim against the lesee or their guest only who has been evicted. The leasee purchased a renters policy two months prior to the damage being done. Will their renters coverage cover their own furniture and clothing for damages?
The cleaning requires a professional fogging of the home and wiping of walls, ceilings, and all exposed furnishings. Someone with a medical condition that can not be exposed to chemicals may not tolerate even after a cleaning without a reaction. The cleaning is done by a licensed certified industrial company who is frequently used by police and sheriffs departments for major cleanups.
A call to the insurance agent and a request for coverage if a claim is submitted was made. The agent called the underwriter to get an opinion. He returned a call to me stating that all we could do was turn in a claim and see what they will do. I believe this is unacceptable in that there is no exclusion in the policy evidently and if so, I would have been told there was no coverage. It was suggested by the testing and cleaning company that it be turned in as a comprehensive claim as it was a willful act of vandalism of the property with a known chemical to be dangerous to humans.
If the claim is allowed, would the insurer be a permitted to subrogate a claim against the lesee or their guest only who has been evicted. The leasee purchased a renters policy two months prior to the damage being done. Will their renters coverage cover their own furniture and clothing for damages?
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2012 05:34 pm Post Subject:
each case is subject to the specific policy in place at the time of loss.
This is the reason I specifically asked if the poster had READ HIS POLICY. We can conjecture all day long as to what is or is not covered, what we have seen covered in our past experiences, and none of it means anything without a reading of the actual contract in force at the time of the loss.
You'll also notice, the OP has never returned to the discussion.
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 11:57 am Post Subject:
Great to know this.
Add your comment