Love and marriage, love and marriage,
Gotogether like a horse and carriage.
This I tell ya,brother,
You can't have one without theother.

When Frank Sinatra originally recorded the Sammy Cahn/Jimmy VanHeusen song in 1955, “Love and Marriage” became a huge hit. Yet,like many once-popular notions, those lyrics seem nostalgicallyquaint in our current world. And that analogy! I love my wife, butif I told her I considered our relationship to be just like a horseand carriage, the only remaining question would be exactly how manydays would pass before I regained consciousness in the intensivecare unit.

Even in this traditional month of Valentine’s Day and all thingsromantic, the world has clearly moved on in its definition ofcommitment and relationships. Except, it seems, in the personallines universe. Doctor Who’s Tardis must have malfunctioned onceagain, because the personal lines forms are clearly living in thelast century—at least as pertaining to who is an insured.

For example, here is the applicable policy wording from thecurrent homeowners form, ISO HO 3 05 11:

Definition A.

In this policy,“you” and“your” refer to the“named insured” shown in theDeclarations and the spouse if a resident of the samehousehold. “We”,“us” and“our” refer to the Company providingthis insurance.

Evidently when it comes to homeownerspolicies, coverage and marriage still go together.

The ISO personal auto policy (PP 00 01 01 05) has the samelanguage, with one interesting additional requirement:

If the spouse ceases to be aresident of the same household during the policy period or prior tothe inception of this policy, the spouse will be considered“you” and“your” under this policy but onlyuntil the earlier of:

1. The end of90 days following the spouse’s change ofresidency;

2. Theeffective date of another policy listing the spouse as a namedinsured; or

3. The end ofthe policy period.

When it comes to auto, you better not only be married, but youbetter still be living together!

Here are a few salient facts from the latest U.S. Census Bureausurveys:

• In 1970, the percentage of households who fell under thecategory “Married with children” was 40.3%; in 2012 it was19.6%.
• “Married without children”: 1970 – 30.3%; 2012 – 29.1%
• “Other family”: 1970 – 1.7%; 2012 – 6.1%

The total percentage of “married” dropped from 70.6% of allhouseholds recorded to less than half (48.7%). Clearly that isstill a significant percentage of the marketplace, but the trend isclear. Regardless of the demographic makeup of the remaininghouseholds—single, living alone; adults living together; blendedfamilies in which the parents haven’t married—the key fact for usis that the policies we offer on a daily basis were never designedto fit this new reality “as is.”

Let me be clear: I’m not raising this as a moral or judgmentaldiscussion. Whether we personally consider all these changes anadvancement in civilization or proof of marriage's decline is notthe issue. The key issue is the reality that we have a growingmultitude of insurance consumers counting on us for professionaladvice and counsel who no longer fit the “resident spouse” mold.When we try to adequately protect 21st century individuals andtheir households with last century insurance policy language,disaster is imminent.

Plus, this shifting household landscape goes far beyond thelegal relationship of two consenting adults. Consider thisadditional definition from the ISO Homeowners form:

DefinitionB.5.
“Insured”means:

a. You and residents of yourhousehold who are:

(1) Your relatives;or
(2) Other persons under the age of 21 and in yourcare or the care of a resident of your household who is yourrelative;

b. A student enrolled in schoolfull-time, as defined by the school, who was a resident of yourhousehold before moving out to attend school, provided the studentis under the age of:

(1) 24 and your relative;or
(2) 21 and in your care or the care of a residentof your household who is your relative;

So who else may be living in an insured’s household today thatthe standard form’s language has left on the coverage curb? Hereare a few examples represented among my own friends, family andneighbors:

• A resident non-spouse “significant other”
• Resident children of the “significant other”
• Non-resident spouses and relatives
• Non-relative residents
• Relatives of a former spouse who no longer lives with you (it’snot unknown for the former in-laws to remain close to an insuredfollowing a divorce, particularly when grandchildren arepresent)
• A former spouse who is still resident (not unknown in a toughfinancial situation, or when custody of children is shared).

Add in the usual array of possible roommates, boarders, andtenants, and the personal lines coverage recommendation fields areeither white unto harvest or flirting with disaster.

Regular readers know I’m a “white unto harvest” guy myself, sogap-filling coverage arrows should be a key part of your 21stcentury household personal lines quiver. For example, here are twokey homeowner possibilities:

• Carrier underwriting options: Much of the “resident spouse”trap that threatens non-spouse significant others can be erased byadding the significant other as a named insured to the homeownerspolicy. At what point, if ever, will a carrier be willing to dothat? A given time period of stable residency? Although it mayappear logical, there is a huge difference in coverage exposure toa carrier for property and liability when an insured acquires along-term cohabitant. Then why do all those underwritingworries—and premium considerations—seem to miraculously disappearwhen the couple invests in a marriage license?
• If a carrier, for whatever valid underwriting reasons refusesthe “named insured” option, then the non-owner needs at a minimuman HO-4 (renter’s policy) or, if available, the descriptively namedHO 04 58: Other Members of Your Household.

If Frank Sinatra and Sammy Cahn were to record today, the songmight go something like this:

Love and marriage, love and marriage,
Havegone the way of the horse and carriage.
Even ifyou’re a Dad or Mother,
It’s up to you to wed orother.

And whither they goest, their insurance should go also.

You can’t get much more romantic than that.

The Director of Global Claims with Aon Risk Solutions,Jennifer Peck discusses the global claims landscape at the 19thannual America’s Claims Event, June 17-19 in Austin. For moreinformation, click here and use Code PC360AE & Save$100.