Q
We have a question on coverage under an HO 00 03 05 01 for stolen property. The insured's grandson, who resides in another state, visited his grandfather, borrowed some tools, and drove to a camp owned by his grandfather. He had intended to stay at the camp, but returned to his grandfather's.
The next day he and his grandfather went to the camp and found many items, including the tools, had been stolen.
We turned in a claim to the homeowners insurer, but it was denied because the property was at another residence “owned by, rented to, or occupied by” the insured. Is this correct? There was no insurance on the camp.
Michigan Subscriber.
A
Unfortunately for your insured, the insurance company is justified in denying this claim. The exclusionary language for theft of personal property at any other residence of the insured arose because theft, particularly from an unoccupied location, has long been considered a strong possibility. Had the loss been caused by, say, a fire, then there would have been coverage for the loss.
This premium content is locked for FC&S Coverage Interpretation Subscribers
Enjoy unlimited access to the trusted solution for successful interpretation and analyses of complex insurance policies.
- Quality content from industry experts with over 60 years insurance experience, combined
- Customizable alerts of changes in relevant policies and trends
- Search and navigate Q&As to find answers to your specific questions
- Filter by article, discussion, analysis and more to find the exact information you’re looking for
- Continually updated to bring you the latest reports, trending topics, and coverage analysis
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact our Sales Department at 1-800-543-0874 or email [email protected]