Those who work in the insurance industry–and particularly in claims–can tell many serious stories about huge losses they've handled involving large monetary payouts, considerable damage to property, and even tragic loss of life. Conversely, these same professionals all generally have once-in-a-lifetime war stories about unusual claims that are more entertaining than serious in nature–at least for those inside the business–which most are happy to share when prompted.

“You get enough claims where there are fatalities…or there are fires, or serious loss of property,” that it's nice to share stories that are a bit more lighthearted, according to Doug Rost, who has worked for various companies as an underwriter but has seen multiple claims during his years in the industry.

Some stories raise an eyebrow, and perhaps a chuckle, based on the lack of description of the circumstances. Mr. Rost cited one instance at a company he worked for where a small reserve was set up on a claim involving an unknown person entering an insured trailer of a truck and reportedly defecating in the corner. The claims department gave no other description.

“I remember one day I was sitting at an underwriting desk, and a friend of mine–another underwriter–and I came across this claim,” Mr. Rost explained. “And we read the claim notes, and it was hilarious. There weren't a lot of notes, and that's what made it even funnier. It was a small reserve. Whoever made the comments about the claim did so very sparingly.”

Mr. Rost added, “Anyway, there it was–solid proof that 'it' happens.”

Sometimes “it” happening is not the problem, but rather what to do with it once “it” does.

Marc Dubois–who has 34 years of experience in the claims business and currently is the owner of the Florida adjusting firm M.G.D. Claims Services Inc.–told a story about a municipality that attempted to find a creative way to turn the sludge left over from its sewage treatment process into a profit. The municipality's initial attempt did not go according to plan.

Mr. Dubois explained that the idea was to polish the waste off into pellets and sell it to the Chinese, who would then use the excrement as fertilizer.

The municipality hired a firm out of Montreal “to build this cyclone, which basically was a polishing apparatus where the sludge would vibrate amongst a series of felt-covered wires inside and get polished off,” Mr. Dubois recalled, noting that the cyclone contained a steel cover that was 80 feet in diameter.

“However, one of the felts had worn off and the wire got excessively hot,” said Mr. Dubois–noting that the heat, combined with the high methane content, blew the stainless steel cover off of the cyclone and through the roof of the building.

“So I get the call for the builder's risk, because the sewage plant was still under construction,” Mr. Dubois said. When he got there, he said there was waste plastered all over the building, and a gaping hole in the roof.

The contractors who constructed the building and the people who installed the cyclone equipment were called, and they had planned to bring in a crew from Montreal, put them up in hotels, and have them ferry parts to and from Montreal to repair the cyclone.

“I said, 'You know what? That's a complete and utter waste of time and money,'” said Mr. Dubois, who devised a simpler solution.

“What you're going to do is unbolt [the cyclone] from the floor,” he said. “We'll get a crane to come in and haul it out through that nice big hole in the roof. We'll put a temporary roof on. We'll put [the cyclone] on a flatbed, bring it to the plant in Montreal, fix it on site, bring it back here and drop it back in through the same hole. We'll fix the roof after.”

Mr. Dubois said he did not know if the municipality is still using the same cyclone machine, but noted they did go back to the same operation of recycling the sludge for a profit. “I think that process is used elsewhere as well,” he added.

The resolution of this dispute involved some unconventional thinking on the part of the claims professional–which is often the case with unique claims, our readers say.

George Neale, senior vice president of claims for Liberty Mutual's Business Market, described a situation involving a plant that made fructose sweetener for a major soft drink manufacturer.

Liberty insured the manufacturer of the fructose sweetener, recalled Mr. Neale. The location where the plant was situated experienced an “unusually cold day,” which caused some problems with the sweetener that were unknown at the time. These problems, he emphasized, did not involve any health risks, but “it just made [the soft drink] taste pretty bad.”

“And so all of this fructose sweetener that got shipped out to one of the very major soft drink manufacturers ended up getting sent around the country–bottled, sent to several theater chains, and so forth,” he said.

Ultimately, around 250,000 cases of the drink had to be recalled, according to Mr. Neale, but that was only where the real issues began.

“The biggest problem we had on the claim was the disposal of the bad soft drink,” he said. “What we found was disposing of cola is not an easy thing to do”–because the sugar and acidity would clog and ruin sewage equipment if the drink was simply poured down the drain.

Additionally, Mr. Neale said the bottles were worth more than the cola inside, “so we actually needed to drain the drink and save the bottles, and then [find a way to] dispose of the contents.”

Mr. Neale noted that “ultimately, what we came up with was to have the soft drink made into molasses cubes, and then it was fed to cows out in Kansas.” He reiterated that there was nothing wrong with the cola and the cows were in no danger–the cola simply failed the manufacturer's taste test.

Liberty ended up paying to have the cola processed into the molasses cubes, Mr. Neale said. “That was kind of a once-in-career incident that you'll never run into again,” he added.

The entire incident, though, involved no consumer claims.

Mr. Neale shared another claim that is a bit more conventional, but with an unusual twist. It involved a diner suing a restaurant over a food allergy–except the claim involved a food that was not ingested, but inhaled.

The claimant, allergic to seafood, nevertheless dined at a seafood restaurant that was insured by Liberty. The individual had intended to avoid the seafood on the menu, reported Mr. Neale, “but what happened was that sometimes [the wait staff will] have these sizzling plates they bring by, and it emits this aroma, and so [the claimant] ended up breathing in the aroma of seafood, and had a pretty bad reaction to that and had to be taken to the hospital.”

The individual submitted a claim, which Liberty denied, stating that the claimant had assumed the risk by going into the restaurant when he knew he was allergic to seafood. The case went to court, Mr. Neale said, “and shockingly, we lost.”

The claimant had argued the restaurant should have posted a warning that there could be airborne seafood aromas that might trigger allergic reactions, and the jury apparently agreed. Asked if the restaurant posted a warning after the case, Mr. Neale said, “I don't know. It's such a rare situation, I have to doubt it.” He added, “Trust me, we were shocked by [the decision].”

While some claims, such as the last one described by Mr. Neale, inevitably end up in the courts, others are settled in more unconventional ways.

In 1979, Wayne Salen–who is currently director of risk management at Labor Finders International, a staffing company headquartered near West Palm Beach, Fla.–received an odd claim while working in a risk management role for a large regional superstore chain that operated in six states.

Mr. Salen said he received a claim notice from the manager of one of the smaller, older stores in the chain for the life of a dog.

An older, retired couple had purchased a ham at the store, Mr. Salen said, and they told the store manager that the ham had killed their dog.

Mr. Salen said the store manager began chuckling when telling the story, but that he realized right away this wasn't funny for the dog's owner, and wouldn't be a routine claim to settle. “I said…this is probably going to be a little bit different than a normal slip-and-fall on a grape, or someone getting their finger pinched in the checkout belt'–because those were our problems back in those days,” he added.

The couple was contacted, and Mr. Salen discovered that they had partially eaten the ham without incident, and then left it in the refrigerator for about two weeks before feeding it to the dog. Additionally, the dog was around 15 years old.

“After spending probably about an hour on the phone with them over two or three phone calls…they finally came to the conclusion that the dog was pretty old, and the ham had been in there quite awhile, and they really hadn't checked it…but they were so shook up about losing a longtime family member,” Mr. Salen said.

To settle the claim, he offered the couple $50 in coupons, and they accepted. They used the coupons and remained customers of the store, according to Mr. Salen.

Another claim involving a dog serves as a reminder that while a dog may be man's best friend, that probably depends on which side of the leash you are on.

Mr. Rost described a scenario that involved the insured–a private business that was protected by a guard dog–an unfortunate salesman, and a damaged vehicle owned by neither the insured nor the salesman.

The salesman had approached the business property during normal operating hours, Mr. Rost said, but for some reason, the guard dog was not properly secured. The dog chased the salesman, who leapt onto the roof of a nearby car in an effort to escape.

The salesman was uninjured, but the car suffered damage, and the insurer of the business that owned the dog had to pay the claim.

“This claim ended up being a valid property damage general liability loss against our business owner, as the dog was truly the catalyst/cause of the vehicle damage,” Mr. Rost reported.

“I have a healthy respect for animals, so I can't blame [the salesman] for jumping up on the vehicle trying to get away from the dog. You don't know what the dog is going to do,” he added.

Describing the uniqueness of the claim, Mr. Rost said, “It's not very often that you have a third party visit your premises that does damage to another third-party property, and you pay for it.”

As for the lesson to be learned from this claim, Mr. Rost said: “If you don't control your exposures to loss, you could have a claim.”

Sometimes, though, even controlling your exposures by following the instructions of your policy to the letter cannot prevent a loss. And in this next case, the culprit was not a dog, but rather a beast many times larger.

American Collectors Insurance–a managing general agency that secures insurance coverage for collector vehicles–sent a story by e-mail, which it called, “The Steer and the Steering Wheel.”

The American Collectors-issued policy required the insured to park his collector car in an enclosed garage, which he did. However, the insured had a son who raised steers on the property, which he would show at livestock fairs and other events.

“The son was washing a steer, preparing it for an upcoming show,” American Collectors reported. “The steer got loose…and ran into the area where the classic vehicle was stored. The animal got wedged between the car and the wall of the building, putting scratches and dents on the car. The insured and his son were able to free the animal without injuries, but there was substantial damage to the collector vehicle.”

This story provides valuable lessons for collectors of classic vehicles, according to American Collectors. “If you collect Mustangs, watch out for the bull. And if you wash a steer, keep it away from the steering wheel.”