Question. Our insured recently got a waterbill that was thousands of dollars. When he called the town todispute it, they investigated and found a leak in the water main tohis building. The leak occurred after the meter, so he was beingcharged for the increased water usage.

He knows that underground pipes are excluded, but thequestion is whether the water and increased bill can somehow beclaimed under his policy.

— Connecticut Subscriber

Answer. It is our opinion that the insuredcannot make a claim for the water and the increased bill under thepolicy. Water is listed under property not covered, so the loss ofthe water is not insurable on the CP 00 10.

Related: Top 6 insurable incidents small business ownersfaced in 2016

Question. We are a firm working for aninsurer and handling a commercial property water loss occurringfrom overflow of a toilet. The insured made a claim for theincrease in the water bill for the period of time that the waterran prior to discovery.

We have always considered this part of the personal propertyloss, as once the water passes through the meter, it becomes theinsured's property. The insurer advised us to inform the insuredthat the increase in utility expense is not covered, in accordancewith the policy CP 00 10 04 02, A. 2. Property Not Covered, h.Land, water, growing crops or lawns.

We believe the water the insured is referring to refers tobodies of water, not utility water.

I could not find any reference in my search to justify myprior interpretation or to refute the company's interpretation ofwater in the cited policy language. Can you assist?

— Iowa Subscriber

Answer. Because the policy does notspecify a type of water that is to be considered property notcovered, the insurer is justified in denying coverage under A.2.h.Even if it does become the insured's personal property afterpassing through the meter, it is still water and categorized asproperty not covered.

Related: 5 best practices for valuing water-damaged items

Question. I have had two recent scenariosthat involve an increased water bill following a covered loss. Inboth cases we have substantial increased water usage due to thebreak in a pipe that is covered. We have always presented thisincreased water bill as a loss of use claim for increased livingexpenses as the water is a utility. It has always been paid in thepast but recently we have had two denials of coverage for thisincreased cost.

In both cases they are saying that the water falls undercoverage C as personal property. Because there is an exclusion forwater as personal property they are not covering the increasedwater bill. Again, we have always presented previous water usageand the increased usage and made a claim for an increase in livingexpenses. What is your thought on this?

— New HampshireSubscriber

Answer. While loss of use is a broad coverage,the insured has to be displaced in order for it to come into play.Water is specifically excluded, and it is not part of coverage A orB. Under older ISO forms it was not excluded, but it is now. Yourprevious losses that were covered were likely on the old form, andthe newer losses are falling under the newer form. The carriers arecorrect; there is no coverage for the loss of water.

Analysis brought to you by the experts at FC&SOnline, the unquestioned authority on insurance coverageinterpretation and analysis for the P&C industry. To find outmore—or to have YOUR coverage question answered—visit www.nationalunderwriter.com/FCS.