This week much of the country has been frozen solid due to a phenomenon known as the polar vortex: arctic air that has come further south due to changes in the jet stream. Not only are cars frozen shut and water on walks and streets frozen solid, but the risk of frozen pipes rears its ugly head. At temperatures at or below zero with wind chills into the negative numbers, claims for frozen pipes are bound to start rolling in.
One past question about frozen pipes concerned the setting of the insured's thermostat: 42 degrees. The pipes froze, and the question was whether or not the homeowners policy had any requirements of keeping the property at a certain temperature. The answer is no; however, the policy does require the heat to be left on or, if the heat is turned off, the pipes to be drained of water. While there is no set temperature, 42 degrees is not far above freezing, and the Institute for Business and Home Safety recommends leaving the temperature no lower than 55 degrees, which seems to be standard among Internet sources. However, with no specified temperature, the carrier should cover the loss. Readers may want to advise insureds, however, to leave the heat at 55 degrees to ensure pipes do not freeze.
A similar question on a commercial policy involved sprinkler pipes in the ceiling of a building that had been held for rental for four months. There were no tenants during that time, the building was available to be rented, and was shown many times. Whether or not the heat was left on in the building had not been determined. In this situation, the building was considered vacant and coverage would not apply. Had the sprinkler pipes been protected against freezing, there may have been coverage had the building had tenancy of at least 31 percent.
In a rental situation, an insured who owned a rental property required his tenant to be responsible for paying the utilities. The tenant stopped paying for the heating oil, which resulted in frozen pipes and water damage. The insured was unaware of this until she evicted the tenant for nonpayment of rent. Since the tenant was responsible for maintaining the heat but did not, does the exclusion apply? This property was not vacant or even unoccupied. It was occupied by a negligent — and probably very cold — tenant. Therefore, the exclusion for freezing does not apply. Even though the heat was not reasonably maintained, the insured reasonably thought it was being maintained, and therefore cannot be punished because of the actions of a negligent tenant.
These are some of the more common scenarios that occur when the weather turns bitterly cold. Anyone dealing with insureds would be wise to advise them to leave the heat set at 55 degrees or above or to drain the pipes (unless a fire sprinkler system is present) before turning off the heat. Many policies require the water to be left on if a sprinkler system is present, thus requiring the heat to be left on as well.
2/10/2014
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
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact our Sales Department at 1-800-543-0874 or email [email protected]