They are going to say there is no physical damage to trigger coverage, and the food isn’t contaminated. they are also going to site case law regarding civil authority coverage, as most policies require physical damage to adjacent or nearby property and they wont be able to make the connection between the gov order and the physical damage. Policy language on this has been restricted in years following disasters like 9/11 and hurricane sandy. Even for contingent BI, there needs to be a physical damage trigger in the supply chain for the coverage to respond.
Unless the government comes into play and specifically looks to make insurers pay, the policy language won’t be there to provide coverage.
Just think of the possible lawsuits by customers if they don’t shut down?
Since no definition in the policies for direct and physical , I checked Webster.
Direct: “in an unbroken line with nothing or no one between.” Physical:”of nature and all matter” I would think a building, personal property, tables chairs , food etc are matter and the
damage is being caused by the virus (direct), so why not cover BI.Heck , they may have to pay for any cleaning. Plus no one knows that if once you clean, why can’t it come back? What food spoilage?
Speaking of interruption, went into the office yesterday morning and someone had cleaned out the entire building of TP. Restrooms and storeroom. The replacement value was just below our deductible. Good grief!
If a portion of the argument against Business Interruption states that the Insurance Company MAY for clean up and restoration… If that’s so why would an owner re-open and allow the customers to re-contaminate?
On another note… How many of the huge corporations.. American Airlines… Large Manufacturing facilities.. etc.. do have business interruption that does cover employees wages… loss of business etc. Has anyone in the Federal Government looked into this before we hand out the Billions of dollars to these companies to keep them alive.. And to continue their employee’s wages.. If not it would be a good (smart) choice for the Federal Government to investigate.
They are going to say there is no physical damage to trigger coverage, and the food isn’t contaminated. they are also going to site case law regarding civil authority coverage, as most policies require physical damage to adjacent or nearby property and they wont be able to make the connection between the gov order and the physical damage. Policy language on this has been restricted in years following disasters like 9/11 and hurricane sandy. Even for contingent BI, there needs to be a physical damage trigger in the supply chain for the coverage to respond.
Unless the government comes into play and specifically looks to make insurers pay, the policy language won’t be there to provide coverage.
Yep, not to mention the broader scope of policies that require the government action and/or damages related to a covered peril.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Speaking of interruption, went into the office yesterday morning and someone had cleaned out the entire building of TP. Restrooms and storeroom. The replacement value was just below our deductible. Good grief!
Let’s not forget that most policies have excluded Virus or Bacteria for many years now.
If a portion of the argument against Business Interruption states that the Insurance Company MAY for clean up and restoration… If that’s so why would an owner re-open and allow the customers to re-contaminate?
On another note… How many of the huge corporations.. American Airlines… Large Manufacturing facilities.. etc.. do have business interruption that does cover employees wages… loss of business etc. Has anyone in the Federal Government looked into this before we hand out the Billions of dollars to these companies to keep them alive.. And to continue their employee’s wages.. If not it would be a good (smart) choice for the Federal Government to investigate.