A homeowners insurer instructed its insureds, who had incurred a burglary loss well in excess of $100,000, to complete and furnish proofs of loss within 60 days. They completed the forms and returned them by certified mail 58 days after receiving the instructions.

The insurance company received the proofs 64 days after the insureds received the notice. It contended that they had failed to comply with a 60 day statutory requirement for submission of proofs, and sought summary judgment with respect to its coverage obligations. The insurer argued that proofs of loss must be received, rather than mailed, within the statutory period. Trial court judgment in favor of the insureds was appealed.

The appeal court interpreted the pertinent New York statute to mean that proofs would be "furnished" to the insurance company when they were mailed. It said that a contrary interpretation would result in forfeiture, even when the insureds placed the proofs in the mail in the belief that they would be received by the company within the prescribed period, but were not because of inefficiency or mistake of the post office.

The court concluded that the statute requiring the insureds to furnish proofs of loss within 60 days should be construed to require only that the insureds place such proofs in the mail within 60 days of receiving a written demand for such proofs.

Trial court judgment was reversed in favor of the insureds; the insurer's motion for summary judgment was denied.

Editor's Note: It is in an insured's interest to stress the importance of avoiding last minute compliance with requirements that are subject to a time limit. Few documents requiring compliance by mail contain what National Flood Insurance premium notices make clear with regard to certified mail: "In those cases where the renewal premium payment and this notice are mailed to the NFIP prior to the expiration date by certified mail, the certified mailing date is considered to be the date of receipt by NFIP."

(MICHAEL A. BALL ET AL., Appellants v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY. Court of Appeals of New York. March 30, 1993. 611 North Eastern Reporter 2d 750.)