Courts Uphold Denials of Coverage Even in the Absence of Mold,Lead, and Asbestos Exclusions |
| |
Authors: | Howard M. Tollin Frank Piccininni Chang Liu |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. SterlingRisk;2. Environmental Services;3. SMPIL Consulting, Ltd.;4. Kaufman, Dolowich, &5. Voluck, LLP |
| |
Abstract: | Courts have upheld insurers’ disclaimers on mold, lead, and asbestos claims under comprehensive general liability (CGL) policies, evidencing the importance of maintaining affirmative cover in the emerging environmental insurance marketplace. Removing a CGL mold, lead, or asbestos exclusion is helpful, but insurers may assert a coverage defense and not pay a claim for reasons that have included: failure to meet the burden of proof, failure to trigger coverage, an absolute pollution exclusion, a preexisting condition exclusion, a defective design exclusion, a faulty workmanship exclusion, a business risk exclusion, a known loss or loss in progress, a custody and control exclusion, an owned property exclusion, and late notice. Accordingly, affirmative coverage grants contained in environmental insurance policies are necessary to protect against such losses and maximize recoveries. |
| |
Keywords: | |
|
|