While grooming a dog, the insured accidentally burned it with the hair dryer. The dog's owner incurred substantial veterinarian bills for the care of the injured animal.

We turned the claim in to the BOP insurer. They have denied it under the liability section, based on the care, custody, or control exclusion. We understand that. We think, though, that the dog qualifies as property of others and, as such, is covered by the property section of the BOP.

What do you think?

Ohio Subscriber

It is interesting to note that the commercial property (CP) policy specifies that animals are property not covered. If this risk were written on a CP policy, our discussion would end here. However, the BOP has a much shorter list of property not covered than does the CP, and animals are not on that list.

The BOP does say that covered property includes "property of others that is in your care, custody, or control." As the dog meets this criterion, the damage to it is covered under the property section of the BOP.

The loss payment condition of the BOP says that property of others is covered at actual cash value. It then limits payment to the amount "for which [the insured is] liable." In this case that amount could be quite large, if the insured is found liable for the vet bills