In last week's edition, National Underwriter ethics columnist Peter R. Kensicki reported on reader feedback to his latest challenge: What are the ethical issues raised by lawsuits over claims for wind-versus-water damage following Hurricane Katrina? I have my own thoughts on the subject, briefly outlined in this entry, but please check out the column for yourself by clicking here and then weigh in with your take on the situation.
Personally, I think while it's pretty clear that insurance does not cover flood-related damages, it's not quite so clear that such exclusions applied to all the damage being attributed to storm-surge in Mississippi. And I certainly wouldn't want to be in an Ole Miss courthouse trying to convince a jury of locals what I meant to exclude in the policy.
Read the column and feel free to post your observations and opinions. Are insurers in the clear here? Are they simply being taken advantage of by a politically-minded state attorney general? Or do they bear any of the responsibility for the confusion–and litigation–that's ensued? I look forward to hearing from you.
Want to continue reading?
Become a Free PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader
Your access to unlimited PropertyCasualty360 content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:
- Breaking insurance news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
- Weekly Insurance Speak podcast featuring exclusive interviews with industry leaders
- Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
- Critical converage of the employee benefits and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, BenefitsPRO and ThinkAdvisor
Already have an account? Sign In Now
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
