Fire or Smoke as Cause of Loss

October 19, 2009

Our insured has a CP 00 10 04 02 and the special causes of loss form, CP 10 30 04 02.
He is a doctor with an enclave sterilizer. The unit malfunctioned, overheated, melted the equipment inside, and spewed smoke that caused burning eyes to the people in the immediate area.
While the sterilizer is not covered, would the extreme heat that melted the items inside be considered a fire or smoke loss? Do flames have to be present to be considered fire?

Oregon Subscriber

The situation you describe does not constitute fire. A fire must have combustion or other oxidation that is manifested in a flame or glow. This would not include melting. While there was smoke involved, it sounds like the melting caused the damage to the equipment, not the smoke, so it would not be considered a smoke 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