Because RealPage never held the funds at issue, National Union was within its rights to deny coverage of the stolen funds intended for RealPage's property manager clients. . . And because National Union's coverage was not exhausted, Beazley was also within its right to deny coverage under RealPage's excess policy." (Credit: Supermicro/Shutterstock)
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans has affirmed a lower court's decision in finding that a commercial crime insurer was right in denying coverage in a multimillion-dollar loss in a phishing incident was proper because the insured never "held" the funds intended for its clients, nor did it control the funds designated for them.
Want to continue reading?
Become a Free PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader
Your access to unlimited PropertyCasualty360 content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:
- 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.
Already have an account? Sign In
© 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.
