I am handling a homeowners claim for the roof damages caused by the contractor who abandoned the repair. Homeowner hired a contractor who started the roof tear-off but never came back to complete the repairs. The homeowner filed a claim for vandalism but the carrier denied the coverage.
It appears to me that the policy language: "However, we will pay for any resulting loss from items 3.a., 3.b., and 3.c. unless the resulting loss is itself a Loss Not Insured as described in this Section" indicates that the loss caused by the contractor who abandoned the project is covered as it is not excluded in Section I – Losses not insured. However I wanted to hear your opinion on the coverage. Thank You!
Illinois Subscriber
In your policy, vandalism is only excluded if the dwelling is vacant. I'm assuming the carrier is saying that the act of the contractor abandoning the project is not vandalism. That could be debated – the policy doesn't define vandalism so we go to a standard desk reference as that's what any court would do. Merriam Webster defines vandalism as: willful or malicious destruction or defacement of public or private property. The key clause here is OR – the act must be willful or malicious, but it does not have to be both. Did the contractor willfully abandon the project? Yes. Was property destroyed or defaced? That's a different matter. It was certainly damaged, and its appearance has changed, meeting the definition of deface: to mar the appearance of : injure by effacing significant details. Destroy is defined as: to ruin the structure, organic existence, or condition of.
Even so, the policy is open perils, so what is not excluded is covered, whether or not it meets the definition of vandalism. The issue here is whether or not there is coverage in the exception to the exclusion for faulty workmanship/repair/construction. The exception is for resulting loss due to the excluded items, the faulty workmanship. This would be an ensuing loss – the loss itself is excluded, but damage that results from that loss would be covered.
Therefore, is there any ensuing damage that resulted due to the contractor abandoning the job? If the contractor simply abandoned the job and there is no other damage to the dwelling, then there is no coverage. If however rain has entered the dwelling due to the lack of a completed roof replacement then that would be covered.