A fire occurred in a home located in Aurora, Ohio. As a result, 60% of the windows and sliding doors were destroyed by the fire. The insurance company has agreed to replace the fire-damaged units but hasn't committed on the undamaged units. This structure was custom-built by the insureds in 1984 and all of the windows and doors were manufactured by " Windsor". Windsor is still in business and has given an estimate to replace the windows and doors that were damaged with an exact new model of like, kind and quality. However, the new units now come with a clad finish at the bottom and will not match the undamaged units either on an inside look or outside look. Can the " pair and set clause" be invoked here? Is there another avenue for "matching" windows and doors with the exact model, kind and quality because 40% of the undamaged units will not match. The undamaged units may be cleanable but are smoke damaged and will need to be refinished. 

Ohio Subscriber

Matching is one of those topics that the industry routinely struggles with. FC&S has long maintained that if the insured has a replacement cost policy the insured should be restored to preloss condition; therefore if they had matching windows before the loss, they should have matching windows after the repair is completed. Courts have fallen on both sides of the issue, with some agreeing that the insurer has a duty to match the property while others saying that close enough will work. A number of states, including Ohio, have statutes regarding how matching should be handled. Ohio's statute reads: