Insurance Journal Forums

About 15 years ago I had a client that was found at fault for accidentally starting a large fire inside a building where he rented space. The building was size was 90% of an entire block. The fire started on a cold, extremely windy December night. The flames from the original fire jumped the street and set 5 residential dwellings on fire. Flames jumped the street on the other side to catch several commercial properties on fire. Flames jumped and damaged some trains.

So here is the question. That was a multi million dollar fire that caused fires to different buildings, insured by different insurers and each fire started at a different time and location. When all the insurance companies involved subrogated, should the at fault insureds own company have considered each seperate claim as a different occurrence?

IMHO, No. The original source was the client's fire, and it spread to other locations.

Agreed - your client's negligence is the cause for all of the subsequent fires. Which means that any liability policy aggregates are going to come into play, and the claims will most likely blow through them.

All I can say is "ouch"!

Big Dog wrote:Agreed - your client's negligence is the cause for all of the subsequent fires. Which means that any liability policy aggregates are going to come into play, and the claims will most likely blow through them.

Definitely blew through it!!! It was my cities (over 200,000 population) largest ever fire.