WTC: One Event Or Two?

To The Editor:

NU





|

Akos Swierkiewicz, CPCU
President
IRCOS
Morrisville, Pa.

|

To The Editor:

Thank you to David Thamann for posing this questionto his insurance industry readers, and for an educated response. Weare privileged to relate our professional opinions, wherereasonable minds can differ.

The insurance policy language will or should decide the issue.Shame on the underwriter if the language isn't established in placeprior to the loss, and isn't clear and concise. The property shouldhave been defined as one or two sites in the policy prior to theloss (one risk or two, separately insured). I don't know theanswer, since I haven't read the policy.

The definition of occurrence (if found in the applicable policy)should prevail, if it reads "continuous or repeated exposure tosubstantially the same general conditions"--this is considered asarising out of one occurrence. The concerted terrorist plot,conceived to bring down the towers on the morning of Sept. 11,2001, in my opinion, certainly meets this definition.

|

Wes Anderson, CPCU, AIC
Corporate Claims Manager
Agway Inc.
Syracuse, N.Y.


Reproduced from National Underwriter Property &Casualty/Risk & Benefits Management Edition, November 4, 2002.Copyright 2002 by The National Underwriter Company in the serialpublication. All rights reserved.Copyright in this article as anindependent work may be held by the author.




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.