Coverage Gap Raises Ethical Quandary

The question posed in my last ethics column on March 11 involved gaps in coverage. When coverage terminates for nonpayment of premiums or other valid reasons, insurers may later reinstate coverage back to the termination date when they are assured that no incidents triggering coverage are known to the insured. Is it ethical to declare that coverage existed for the period of time during which there was no coverage?

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free
PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader.


  • All news coverage, best practices, and in-depth analysis.
  • Educational webcasts, resources from industry leaders, and informative newsletters.
  • Other award-winning websites including and

Already have an account?



Join PropertyCasualty360

Don’t miss crucial news and insights you need to make informed decisions for your P&C insurance business. Join now!

  • Unlimited access to - your roadmap to thriving in a disrupted environment
  • Access to other award-winning ALM websites including, and
  • Exclusive discounts on PropertyCasualty360, National Underwriter, Claims and ALM events

Already have an account? Sign In Now
Join PropertyCasualty360

Copyright © 2023 ALM Global, LLC. All Rights Reserved.