This newsletter’s focus is on a loss that ends up illustrating litigation issues that may arise when an applicable policy’s coverage intent has nothing to do with the coverage need. The situation revolved around a loss that took place at a ski resort.

The resort’s food manager had a day off and he spent it by using an employee pass to ski for free. During this activity, he accidentally injured a resort guest who was also using the facility’s slopes. The guest sued and secured a substantial judgment. But the issue really began to snowball afterwards.

Click below to see how litigation resolved an important element – who was responsible for responding to the accident and its financial judgment.

Like many serious disputes, this situation went to the appellate level. The motivation for the claimants to seek help from the courts was, as is typical, financial. An award was won against the off-duty employee, but he was not supported by the deep financial pockets of his employers general liability insurer.

The claimants’ trial level, then appellate level, arguments were that the employee was owed a legal defense and coverage from the resort and its insurance company failed. A CGL offers protection against harm done to others when the injury or damage is connected to the insured company’s operations. That connection did not exist in this loss.

Click here for information on coverage that was relevant to the loss and which is, too often, taken for granted. It is from the Personal and Residential Insurance Section of PF&M ……… found in Advantage Plus.

There’s no disputing that a CGL Policy is versatile and valuable, but only when it’s actually applicable to a loss. While the courts recognized the simple fact that neither a defense nor a coverage obligation was owed in the loss, that misses the point.

Among the objectives that insurance professionals prioritize is to serve their clients by getting the right coverage in place. In our scenario, the insurers serving the resort and the resort employee were not connected. However, they both likely had their own employees or agents that were responsible for meeting their respective clients’ needs. An initial duty in serving needs is to identify them.

Click here to see an inquiry that may be used to secure information from a client. It is from Building Business Letters, found in Advantage Plus.

Those who serve the insuring public, naturally, have a far greater level of awareness of possible exposures. It is important to raise the awareness of current as well as prospective clients. This disparity of knowledge is particularly wide with homeowners, condo-owners, apartment dwellers and other package property policyholders.

For many decades, residential property owners have purchased policies that are packaged, combining property and liability protection. Frequently, customers are quite knowledgeable about the need to protect their property. However, it’s also common that knowledge is lacking regarding personal liability.

Click here for an article that points out the importance of and reasons for carrying higher personal liability insurance limits. It is from Emarketing for Agents found in Advantage Plus.