Product refusal of coverage: Are your clients covered?

In most instances, damages caused by another company’s recall isn’t covered by product recall insurance policies.

Industrial lettuces cultivation in a hothouse. In 2018, the CDC issued a warning about romaine lettuce after E. coli cases were reported in Alaska. (Photo: Fotolia)

In a voluntary recall situation, most product recall insurance policies pay only for specific expenses and losses incurred when a company’s own product is being recalled — not for damages when the same type of product being recalled is grown, produced or shipped by another company. 

For example, a variety of apples from a particular grower have tested positive for a pathogen, and the grower has voluntarily recalled its product. If your client also grows this type of apple and now, because of the recall, vendors refuse to buy this variety from anyone, your client could be sitting on inventory with no market. 

In most instances, this type of collateral damage loss isn’t covered by product recall insurance policies and can financially blindside a business for damages caused by another company’s recall, as well as more significant recall costs. 

Product refusal of coverage endorsement

Collateral coverage for a product recall isn’t found in most recall policies. It’s important to find ways of filling this coverage gap by way of the product refusal of coverage endorsement, which doesn’t require that the recall be triggered by the policyholder’s product. 

The endorsement helps businesses recover some of their recall costs for expenses if a similar product from the insured’s competitor(s) is recalled, including extra expenses to remove the product from shelves and destroy, ship or replace it with a different product. Typically, refusal must occur within 90 days following the initial recall event. 

Product refusal of coverage provides financial protection for recalls caused by a similar product from another company. It pays for a company’s recall costs if buyers refuse to accept the product or ask that it be removed from the marketplace due to contamination concerns, and includes more significant recall expenses such as:  

Did you know …

The product refusal fallout effect 

During the recent romaine lettuce incident, product refusal coverage in policies was not triggered due to policy language. It is critical to understand what can and cannot be covered by various product refusal endorsements.  

Incident one: Romaine lettuce voluntary recall

In 2018, an E. coli outbreak related to romaine lettuce caused 32 people in 11 states to become ill. Because the source of the pathogen could not be traced to a common grower, supplier, distributor or brand, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention urged Americans to avoid eating any romaine lettuce. Although the recall was voluntary, the FDA urged all retailers in all states to immediately remove the product from shelves. 

Incident two: Melon voluntary recall

Also in 2018, a melon recall was issued in eight states as traces of salmonella led to at least 60 illnesses and 31 hospitalizations. Although illnesses were traced to sales involving just three types of pre-cut melons in eight states, growers and suppliers nationwide were urged to pull all types of melons off the shelves, as well as products containing fresh mixed fruits.  

Studies show that product refusal can have a significant financial and reputational impact on a business, taking 12 months or longer for the demand of a product to return after an incident occurs. With the increased frequency of recalls over the past few years — particularly with the farm-to-table trend — product refusal coverage is fast becoming more of a need than a want. It is important for brokers and insured’s to fully understand how product refusal endorsements will or will not respond to certain situations.

Lori Hunter (lhunter@wwfi.com) is an executive vice president at Worldwide Facilities, a national wholesale insurance broker, managing general agent and program underwriter.

This article first appeared on Worldwide Facilities’ website and is republished here with the author’s consent. 

Related: