The question of the month deals with fines imposed by states for those who fail to carry motor vehicle insurance. States require drivers to have motor vehicle insurance and for those drivers who do not have the insurance, there are penalties to be paid. These penalties can range from fines to suspension of licenses or even jail time. As a good selling tool, insurance agents should be prepared to tell auto owners and drivers exactly what the penalty is for not having auto insurance. For information on a state-by-state basis of the penalties for failure to carry motor vehicle insurance (and the state statute imposing the penalty), see the designated article in the Bulletins.

There are several court cases listed in the Dec Page and the subject matters vary. The U.S. Court of Appeals in the Fourth Circuit tackles the issue of one occurrence versus multiple occurrences. An employee was charged with embezzlement from her company over a period of time; was this one occurrence or multiple occurrences under the terms of the insured employer's crime policy? In West Virginia , an inmate at a state correctional facility volunteered to work in the facility's kitchen rather than sit in his cell every day. While working in the kitchen area, he accidentally injured an employee of the company running the food service, and the employee sued the state and the correctional facility. Was the inmate a volunteer worker and thus, an insured under the CGL policy of the jail? In the U.S. District Court in Missouri, the issue to be decided was whether injuries caused in an auto accident were included in the garage operations—other than covered autos section of the insured's garage policy. The insured was charged with causing injury due to managerial acts and decisions; so, is this claim considered separate and distinct from the claims covered by the covered autos section of the policy? Finally, the targeted tender doctrine is discussed in a case from Illinois . Only Illinois and Washington have expressly adopted the targeted tender rule, but the information on this doctrine may be of interest to readers.

Questions and Answers

Does endorsement CG 20 11 require the insurer to indemnify the landlord as an additional insured even if the loss arose from the landlord's own negligence? See Additional Insured Coverage and Vicarious Liability. How does the coverage provided by endorsement CG 22 68 attached to a CGL form compare to garagekeepers coverage under the garage policy? See GKLL Coverage Compared to CGL Coverage.

Does the CGL form exclude coverage for a defamation claim based on postings to Facebook, Linkedin, Twitter, blogs, and the like? See Personal and Advertising Injury Coverage for Defamation Claim. Does the CGL form allow coverage for pollution clean up costs based on a products liability claim? See Pollution Exclusion and Products Liability Claim.

Business Income and Extra Expense Endorsements

Insurance Services Office provides standard business income and extra expense endorsements for general use as part of the simplified language commercial property program. These endorsements are discussed and a brief description of each is provided in this month's issue. See Business Income and Extra Expense Endorsements.

Bailees Customers Coverage Form

The Insurance Services Office (ISO) has a bailees customers coverage form, IH 00 85, that is part of its inland marine program for commercial IM exposures. The article on the Specialty Lines Bci- pages reviews this coverage form, with its insuring agreement, exclusions, conditions, and definitions. And, since the declarations page, IH DS 85, is an integral part of the bailees coverage, that form is also reviewed. See Bailees Customers Coverage Form.