IRMI Update
Risk Management
& Insurance Commentary, Tips, and Tactics
August 5, 2009 | Issue 211 | ISSN: 1530-7948
In This Issue
Colleague,
As part of the upcoming 29th IRMI Construction Risk
Conference, five experienced risk management practitioners will
provide what they consider to be the best practices for ensuring
a successful wrap-up. As moderator of the panel for "Wrap-up
Do's and Don'ts," I would like your help in developing the
topics to be covered. Specifically, I'm looking for the "worst
practices" of wrap-up sponsors and participants.
For example, perhaps you've witnessed a sponsor trying to
cram too large a deductible down a small contractor's throat, or
owners not revealing that a wrap-up would be used until after
the contractors bid the job, or forcing contractors to deduct
premium that their insurers would not be willing to give back.
From the sponsor's perspective, maybe you've seen contractors
submit claims from other projects, fail to follow safety
requirements, or refuse to provide legitimate insurance premium
deductions.
So, tell us your horror stories. What is the worst practice
you've seen on a wrap-up? Provide a brief description, and
explain the trouble it caused. We'll publish the "worst" stories
in the next IRMI Update and
use them to develop a superior conference panel discussion.
[See reader
responses].
This will be an interesting and lively panel discussion, and
I hope to see you there. Early-bird registration will end
shortly, on August 31, and you can save $100 by registering now.
Check out the agenda,
see all the
benefits of attending, and
register
on IRMI.com. I look forward to seeing you on the Potomac.
All the best,
Jack
Jack P. Gibson, CPCU, CRIS, ARM
President
International Risk Management Institute, Inc.
New from IRMI
White Paper: "Effective Contractual Risk
Transfer in Construction"
Get this valuable white paper from IRMI at no charge when you
sign up for
IRMI Construction Risk Manager—a new, free monthly e-mail
newsletter with the same integrity and quality you've come to
expect from IRMI Update. If
you buy, sell, underwrite, or litigate construction insurance or
manage construction risks, this newsletter will become an
essential part of your tool belt.
Learn more.
Risk Tip
Fine-Tune Your Crime Insurance Coverage
Employee dishonesty coverage usually has two features that
can affect recovery. One is that property usually is valued at
its actual cash value, not replacement cost, and the other is
that knowledge of a prior act of dishonesty by an employee
terminates all future coverage for that employee.
Some insurers will provide replacement cost valuation, but
often, it is not offered unless requested. This option should
always be requested to cover property taken by an employee on
the same recovery basis as if it were taken by a non-employee.
Most employee dishonesty forms have an individual employee
cancellation condition which applies if the employer knows that
the employee has previously committed a dishonest act. Some
insurers, if asked, will grant a threshold that must be exceeded
before an act of dishonesty will terminate coverage. For
example, some insurers will place the threshold at $1,000 or so
upon request.
These are two important improvements that can be made to
virtually any crime insurance program which will result in
little to no additional premium.
By: Kenneth Bush, Executive Vice President
Insurance Audit & Inspection Co.
Indianapolis, IN
kbush@insuranceaudit.com
GET PUBLISHED
IN IRMI UPDATE: Send us a practical tip (less than 300 words)
for identifying and managing risks, buying insurance, managing claims,
or filling gaps in insurance coverages. We'll acknowledge your contribution
as we did for Kenneth.
Submit an IRMI
Update risk tip.
What's New in Your
IRMI Library
Is Pollution Personal Injury?
For long-tail claims involving pollution occurring before 1996,
one of the commercial general liability (CGL) insurance coverage
issues that can arise is whether allegations of trespass, nuisance,
or interference with the use and quiet enjoyment of property qualifies
as "wrongful entry" or "invasion of the right of private occupancy"
under the definition of "personal injury." A handful of courts accepted
such arguments and found coverage. Most courts, however, rejected
such arguments, holding that pollution losses couched in terms of
trespass or nuisance were not covered.
In 1996, a total pollution exclusion was included in the personal
injury section of the CGL policy, effectively ending the debate.
However, claims still arise involving pollution released (and triggering
policies written) prior to the revision. The latest supplement of
Pollution Coverage Issues explains
the nuances and enumerates the states with pro-policyholder and
pro-insurer legal precedent. You can expand your knowledge of this
topic by reading the new section in the platform to which you subscribe:
For summaries of other new and updated information in your IRMI
library, go to
What's New on IRMI Online or
What's New in SilverPlume.
Recent Articles on
IRMI.com
New Expert Commentary
There are over 1,100 risk management and insurance articles on
IRMI.com. Below you'll find summaries of some recent additions with
links to the articles.
IRMI Featured Publication
Prevent Coverage Gaps
You're just a few clicks away from having an expert at your fingertips.
Commercial Liability Insurance from IRMI can help you quickly
identify and prevent coverage gaps between primary, umbrella, and
excess liability forms. With help from its practical discussions
of coverage alternatives, you can prepare superior specifications,
submissions, and proposals. You also get a "two-for-one" deal because
Commercial Liability Insurance provides analysis of both CGL
and umbrella policies, rather than paying a separate fee for each.
Plus, the related discussion of supportive court cases is extensive
and up to date.
See a detailed table of contents or request a free demo.