In Karas v. Liberty Ins. Corp., the insureds alleged that the carrier breached the collapse provisions of their policy by declining to compensate them for the purported collapse of their basement walls. (Photo: Shutterstock) In Karas v. Liberty Ins. Corp., the insureds alleged that the carrier breached the collapse provisions of their policy by declining to compensate them for the purported collapse of their basement walls. (Photo: Shutterstock)

While acknowledging the "seriousness of the crumbling foundations problem" and the "gravity of the problem" for many Connecticut homeowners, the Connecticut Supreme Court has issued a decision essentially foreclosing insurance coverage for that damage — except in the most extreme cases.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader

  • All PropertyCasualty360.com news coverage, best practices, and in-depth analysis.
  • Educational webcasts, resources from industry leaders, and informative newsletters.
  • Other award-winning websites including BenefitsPRO.com and ThinkAdvisor.com.
NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Litigation
Personal Lines