On Thursday April 8 a colleague told us about a situation around her home. Apparently a nearby homeowner has a private collection of monkeys, 5 of which had escaped from home and were running through local neighborhoods. Our colleague naturally wondered about how homeowners and commercial property policies would respond if the monkeys damaged any property. As always, we have the answer.
Kentucky Subscriber
Homeowners: Under Section I property, the policy excludes: "Nesting or infestation, or discharge or release of waste products or secretions, by any animals;". This is a very specific exclusion for particular actions of the animals. Animal control said at the time monkeys would find a place to rest at night since witnesses said some were resting in trees. That's not likely to cause damage to the trees.
The exclusion was written to address infestation of termites and other insects, and nesting of squirrels, raccoons, and other common suburban wildlife known to like to nest in attics and under porches. Monkeys however are another issue.
Infestation is not a defined term; Merriam Webster defines infest as: to spread or swarm in or over in a troublesome manner, or to live in or on as a parasite. Monkeys certainly aren't parasites, and unless the monkeys stay together, they're not exactly swarming in or over property. If a monkey damages an insured's siding or deck, that would be covered. Weight of animals is also a covered cause of loss for collapse of a building or any part of a building.
But what about personal property? Remember that is named perils coverage. There is no named peril for animal damage under the standard HO 00 03. Therefore, if the monkey damaged the barbecue and patio chairs, there would be no coverage. Monkeys can't be charged with vandalism or malicious mischief; their actions are simply what the animals do, even if it does destroy property.
Now let's look at commercial property. The special causes of loss form CP 10 30 contains the same nesting and infestation exclusion for animals as the homeowners form, with an added exception that would provide coverage for specified causes of loss or building glass breakage if either were caused by the excluded peril. So with this exception, if the monkeys were to break out building glass, cause a fire or explosion, or vandalize property, there would be coverage under the commercial property form for covered property. Again though, monkeys can't really be charged with vandalism.
Under the Limitations section, there is an added exclusion that will not provide coverage for loss or damage to the animals, unless it is caused by a specified cause of loss or building glass breakage, and it results in a need to kill or destroy the animals. Putting this into a scenario, if a windstorm blows out the windows in an insured building, there will be coverage for the window glass replacement or repair, but no coverage if the monkeys are injured by the wind or breaking glass. However, if the monkeys are killed by the wind or broken building glass, or their injuries require their destruction, then there will be coverage for the monkeys. The same coverages would hold true if the monkeys accidentally cause a fire or explosion, or any other specified cause of loss that leads to their death or destruction.
There could be claims filed under the monkeys' owners liability section of the policy. If the insured is found to be legally liable for damage the monkeys caused, would his homeowners policy respond? The answer is yes. Any damage or injuries caused by an animal owned by an insured would be covered. The only exclusion would be if the monkeys were in the care of someone caring for them as part of a business, such as a boarding facility or vet.
Under the commercial property form, since the monkeys are not owned by the insured, if the monkeys are killed or destroyed, the carrier will adjust their loss valuation with the monkeys' owners, and the amount paid will be limited to the respective owner's financial interest in the monkey(s).