Texas High Court Sides with Policyholder in Ike-Damaged Property Case

By | February 13, 2017

  • February 13, 2017 at 4:02 pm
    AL in MI says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 1

    I always follow cases such as this to learn how better nit-pick policy language. In one of Liberty Mutual’s current commercials, they paid for a truck that fell thru the ice of a frozen lake. Never having read one of their policies, I would have thought there was an exclusion for off road use that would have denied the claim. Just me thinking.

  • February 15, 2017 at 3:37 pm
    ylwrose28 says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 1
    Thumb down 0

    I guess I can follow the court’s ruling that the wording is ambiguous, but I don’t think any agent (& probably no homeowner except one facing a large fencing bill) ever thought the “structure” or “other structure” was intended to include fencing just because it was fastened on two sides to the house, regardless of the number of bolts. OMG, I know I’m dating myself, but didn’t the old Texas HO policy specifically exclude fencing? I suppose we will be seeing some new Liberty Mutual endorsements forthcoming!

  • February 15, 2017 at 3:40 pm
    ylwrose28 says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 1
    Thumb down 0

    P. S. AL in MI, I may be mistaken but I think the truck on ice commercial you are referring to is for Farmers and not Liberty Mutual. Farmers advertises some very unique and hard to believe claims.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*