A fire in an 18 unit apartment building (no negligence on the part of the landlord), shut the entire building down. The city put up the tenants for a period of time until they were able to find permanent housing and subsequently billed the landlord for the temporary housing expense and put a lien on the property in the amount of $20,801.16.

The policy pays for tenant moving of contents with a $10,000.00 limit, which was exceeded, but the insurance company denied coverage for the housing cost under the building section of the policy, as well as under extra expense.

It is my argument that the cost of the tenants temporary housing should be covered under the business income portion of the claim, as an expense directly related to the fire that reduces the insured's profit for the year. The insurance company has rejected that claim and will not pay the expense. Is there coverage for this expense?

Kentucky Subscriber

Business income coverage is for direct loss of income; if the tenants no longer paid rent while the building was being repaired, that would be business income. It is the direct loss of income related to the loss. The city putting the tenants up is not a loss of income to the business nor does it affect the business directly. Likewise extra expense is for extra expenses in order to minimize the suspension of the business and continue operations; the city putting up the tenants did neither for the insured, so again extra expense does not apply. The tenants that had a tenant's policy would have had additional living expense coverage for their displacement. The carrier is correct, there is no coverage for this loss.