The carrier is trying to say that because there were no utilities on that the home was unoccupied. We have proof that they were actively trying to reinstate the power prior to the onset of cold weather, but that they had lived in the home without the power on and used alternative sources for cooking and light.

In this instance, it is our position that the home was indeed occupied and the claim should be paid. Can you tell me if there is anything in a standard ISO policy that says one must keep utilities on in order for the home to qualify as occupied and your policy to be in force? There are all sorts of alternative energy sources that one could employ. I am curious as to your interpretation.

Indiana Subscriber

The ISO form does not define occupied, nor does it have any requirements that an occupied home must have power, although that is usually required in order for a home to be considered habitable. Since it was summer it is possible to survive without power assuming the insured eats nothing that needs refrigeration and likes cold showers. Merriam Webster defines occupy as to take up a place or extent in space; to reside in as an owner or tenant. Therefore the residence was occupied, although the occupier may not have been as comfortable as most people in their homes.