Other Structures Covered at ACV

May 9, 2016

Under an HO-3 (04 91) section for replacement costs of other structures, would the following be covered? Pool equipment damaged in a fire, awnings attached to the home destroyed by wind, or pump houses destroyed by a tree that fell on the pump house building and then required replacement of the tank and all related equipment?

The form notes that the awnings, carpets. and other types of property are subject to actual cash value (ACV). However, we pay carpet at replacement cost when completed as part of the dwelling. So, if the policy language states that we owe ACV for the list of items, and they are replaced, we pay the RCV for carpet and appliances but not for outdoor equipment such as pool equipment?

For structures that are not buildings, the policy states: "Structures that are not buildings; at actual cash value at the time of loss but not more than the amount required to repair or replace."

The term "replace" seems to denote that we owe replacement cost at the conclusion of the claim and owe ACV unless it is a building settlement for less than $2,500, provided all other provisions have been met and as long as limits have not been exhausted.

Please advise when, if ever, replacement costs are owed for other structures that are not buildings like awnings, fences, sheds, pool equipment, and water tank equipment. When we use the phrase "to repair or replace at the time of the loss but not more than the amount required to repair or replace," does this include replacement cost?

California Subscriber

Other structures and carpet attached to the dwelling are two different things; just because the dwelling is covered at RC does not mean that is owed for other structures that are not buildings, especially when the policy clearly states that certain types of property are settled at ACV. You are misreading the policy. ACV is the most that will be paid but not more than the cost to repair or replace: this does not mean replacement cost is the standard payout. For example, an awning worth $500 ACV is destroyed; however, the cost of a new awning of the same type is available for $300. Even though the policy is ACV, the cost of the replacement awning is used since it is a lesser amount. If a new awning is $800, then the ACV of $500 is what is paid out. The policy is simply stating that the lesser value is used, even if the cost to repair or replace is less than ACV. It could be phrased this way: Settlement is for the lesser of ACV or the cost to repair or replace.

The cost to replace is a factor only when that cost is less than the ACV of the property; in most instances this is not likely.

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