Animal Chewing Not a Result of Infestation

We  have a commercial property claim where the property management company for a housing subdivision discovered damage to the inside of their clubhouse. The damages inside looked like an animal had chewed up portions of the carpet, window sills and doors inside the clubhouse. The insured called an exterminator who advised it appeared a squirrel or similar animal got inside causing the damage.

The exterminator advised that the animal may have come in through one of the vents, a hole in the attic, etc. The property management company had a function in the clubhouse 2 days prior and everything was fine and reported no prior problems with animals/rodents in the building. Insured advised they had no prior problems with rats or other rodents/animals in the building.

Does the nesting/infestation exclusion in the CP10 30 apply to this loss? There is no evidence to suggest prior problems with animals in the building. Damage is in the common area of the clubhouse and would be clear and noticeable. This is not a case of hidden damage that was just noticed per insured. There is no way to know if this one done by one or multiple animals or what “type” of animal caused the damage.

South Carolina Subscriber

It is our opinion that the damage was not the result of an infestation. It sounds like an animal or animals entered the clubhouse, chewed up the items you listed, and left. It does not sound like there is any evidence of nesting or infestation, and thus, the exclusion would not apply.