The fact that Houghtaling is putting forward a compromise shows that despite his lawsuits, he never intended to actually carry any of the cases to trial. He did them for publicity and nuisance value only. He wants a settlement even though the claims are non meritorious. This is a shameful abuse of the legal system and its too bad he won’t be punished for it.
Not to beat a dead on arrival horse, but there is no property damage, with or without a virus exclusion. There are two possibilities – the shutdowns occurred because of property damage, in which case there’s extreme discrimination occurring in that we are all allowed to go to the damaged grocery store and into our damaged homes, but not the arbitrarily selected businesses that have been barred from doing business as usual. The more plausible theory is that this was a prophylactic measure having nothing to do with property damage and everything to do with protection against bodily injury. If your property was damaged by COVID you need not even touch the infected surface to rid it of the “damage”! Just let the virus die a natural death. Are there any other forms of covered property damage that fix themselves?
It’s just like rental reimbursement coverage. There is no rental reimbursement coverage if there is no associated (and covered) comprehensive or collision claim. There is no stand-alone rental reimbursement coverage. Carriers have excluded viruses since Lloyds of London started in 1686. Unless you have a (covered) corresponding property damage or other valid cause of loss / claim, there is no coverage for viruses, and you cannot make a stand-alone business interruption-only claim. There is no business interruption claim unless there is an associated (and covered) property damage or other valid claim. Period. End of discussion. It doesn’t matter what attorneys and politicians may try to say, write, or decree.
The fact that Houghtaling is putting forward a compromise shows that despite his lawsuits, he never intended to actually carry any of the cases to trial. He did them for publicity and nuisance value only. He wants a settlement even though the claims are non meritorious. This is a shameful abuse of the legal system and its too bad he won’t be punished for it.
Not to beat a dead on arrival horse, but there is no property damage, with or without a virus exclusion. There are two possibilities – the shutdowns occurred because of property damage, in which case there’s extreme discrimination occurring in that we are all allowed to go to the damaged grocery store and into our damaged homes, but not the arbitrarily selected businesses that have been barred from doing business as usual. The more plausible theory is that this was a prophylactic measure having nothing to do with property damage and everything to do with protection against bodily injury. If your property was damaged by COVID you need not even touch the infected surface to rid it of the “damage”! Just let the virus die a natural death. Are there any other forms of covered property damage that fix themselves?
It’s just like rental reimbursement coverage. There is no rental reimbursement coverage if there is no associated (and covered) comprehensive or collision claim. There is no stand-alone rental reimbursement coverage. Carriers have excluded viruses since Lloyds of London started in 1686. Unless you have a (covered) corresponding property damage or other valid cause of loss / claim, there is no coverage for viruses, and you cannot make a stand-alone business interruption-only claim. There is no business interruption claim unless there is an associated (and covered) property damage or other valid claim. Period. End of discussion. It doesn’t matter what attorneys and politicians may try to say, write, or decree.