This question involves form CP 10 30 04 02. A water heater burst suddenly, spilled a large amount of water, and was repaired shortly after the damage. But some of the water seeped under the floor and caused a mold problem that was not discovered until months later. The adjuster is denying the mold claim because it constituted water damage that developed over more than the fourteen days cited in the form's exclusions. We think the fourteen-day exclusion does not apply to the additional coverage for fungus because it requires only the water damage to be sudden and accidental. What do you think?

Kentucky Subscriber

We agree that the fourteen-day exclusion would not apply because that exclusion stipulates that there must be repeated seepage, which is not the situation you describe. The additional coverage for fungus would apply as water damage is one of the specified perils, which are covered by the additional coverage. "Water damage" is defined as "accidental leakage or discharge of water as the direct result of breaking apart of an appliance." However, other than this additional coverage, there is no other coverage for the mold damage.