|
||
| by Seth Emmer, Esq. | ||
|
All
too, often some accident or casualty occurs, a claim is submitted to the
Association’s insurance agent for forwarding to the carrier, and a
response is received informing the Board and its Manager that this is
not covered, or some obtusely worded exclusion applies.
Likewise, all too often these letters go on for pages quoting
provisions from the policy which, in all candor, even we lawyers are
hard pressed to follow. Considering recent trends in court decisions holding
Association’s liable not just to third parties, but to unit owners
upon ever expanding bases, this presents a particularly troublesome
issue. And the problem can
be particularly acute where a Unit Owner suffers property damage as a
result of some negligence on the part of the Association. One
situation we faced involved a claim of smoke damage.
As part of its “winterization”
of a predominantly second home, summer condominium complex, the
Association “capped” the fireplace flues - that is, they sealed them
with plastic, Unfortunately they failed to inform the owners of this and
someone came down for a nice winter weekend, lit the fire in the
fireplace, layed back on the couch with a fine brandy and a good book,
only to have smoke pour back into the unit. The
Association filed a claim under its master casualty policy.
However, as in common, it excluded the personal property of the
Unit Owner and, as is becoming common, it continued a large deductible.
As is equally often common the Unit Owner had no Condominium
Owners Policy (an HO-6) and, thus, demanded that the Association pay for
the cost of cleaning his expensive living room furniture, drapes, etc.
The
Insurer took the position that since the Unit Owner was a “named
insured” under the policy, a claim could not be made under the
liability portion of the policy. Rather,
the Association could only collect under the casualty loss portion.
However, that only covered the Unit and not the Unit Owner’s
personal property and was, as mentioned,
subject to substantial deductible. Fortunately,
in that situation we were able to negotiate a resolution with the
Insurer. However, another
similar situation has arisen with another of our clients and this time
the Insurer isn’t flinching yet. All
this points to the need by Boards and their Managers to carefully review
insurance proposals. It
also, unfortunately really points to the need to bring in qualified,
independent insurance advisors to develop “specifications” for the
Association’s insurance needs and/or for the Association to have its
counsel thoroughly review policies.
Many insurance policies, though seeming the same on the surface,
are materially different when their terms are peeled back.
Facing this problem after a loss is not a pleasant experience.
Rather, making the extra effort in obtaining the policies can avoid
unpleasant surprises.
|
|
Marcus, Errico, Emmer & Brooks, P.C. |
| 45 Braintree Hill Office Park, Braintree, MA 02184 |
| Telephone: (781) 843-5000 Fax: (781) 843-1529 |
| E-mail: law@meeb.com |