PROP&CASUAL INS PROD
PROP&CASUAL INS PROD RMI 4224
Popular in Course
Popular in Risk Management And Insurance
verified elite notetaker
This 5 page Class Notes was uploaded by Jabari Wyman on Thursday September 17, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to RMI 4224 at Florida State University taught by Staff in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 14 views. For similar materials see /class/205399/rmi-4224-florida-state-university in Risk Management And Insurance at Florida State University.
Reviews for PROP&CASUAL INS PROD
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 09/17/15
CGL Review Questions RMI 4224 Professor Carson GENERAL QUESTIONS Under Coverage A of the CGL read the insuring agreement and identify six basic conditions that must be ful lled in order for the insurer to be obligated to pay on behalf of the insured Describe what the CGL definition of property damage includes in addition to physical injury to tangible property and the resulting loss of use of that property The necessary ingredients for worldwide coverage for products liability are Describe the specific types of claims that are excluded by the CGL employers liability exclusion Describe an explicit exception to the CGL pollution exclusion Describe the types of contractual liability not covered by the CGL Summarize the exclusions that apply to Coverage CiMedical Payments of the CGL SCENARIOS Quantum Electric is an electrical contractor that has a CGL Explain whether each of the following losses would be covered A QE employee while driving a piece of mobile equipment to a job site negligently damaged a traffic light The municipality made claim against QE for the cost of repairs QE brought a fuel tank containing 200 gallons of gasoline to the job site The tank which was corroded ruptured and spilled its contents QE was liable for cleanup costs QE signed a subcontracting agreement with a general contractor The agreement obligated QE to hold the general contractor harmless for all loss involved in any way with QE s work The owner of the project subsequently sued the general contractor for bodily injury resulting from its negligent supervision of QE s work The general contractor then made a claim against QE under the hold harmless agreement An employee of QE was injured on the job and collected workers compensation bene ts The employee s spouse then made claim against QE for loss of consortium QE borrowed a generator from another contractor Through neglect by QE employees the generator was severely damaged The owner of the generator asked QE to pay for repairs A furnace that QE had negligently installed in a new building caused a re shortly after the building was occupied by its owner The owner sued QE for the resulting damage to the building including the furnace and to the owner s personal property Furnace Building and personal property Seafood and Spirits SampS is a bar and grill located in a leased building and insured under a CGL with no endorsements Explain whether each of the following liability claims against SampS would be covered Under a hold harmless agreement in SampS s lease ofpremises SampS became legally obligated to indemnify the landlord for a bodily injury judgment against the landlord SampS provides its customers with valet parking in a lot on SampS s premises While one of SampS s employees was parking a customer s car he negligently struck and injured a pedestrian Claims were made against SampS by the following persons The pedestrian for bodily injury The customer for damage to her car The employee for injuries he sustained in the accident While unloading an SampS truck an SampS employee negligently dropped a box of frozen sh and broke the foot of a passerby An SampS bartender served liquor to a patron who was obviously intoxicated After the patron left SampS the patron attempted to drive home and injured another motorist The injured motorist sued SampS Explain whether each of the following pollution losses would be covered under the CGL An above ground storage tank located on the insured premises and containing heating oil suffered a sudden and accidental rupture and the escaping oil polluted a stream A family became ill from noxious gases that escaped from newly installed carpeting that was the insured s product People at an industrial site neighboring the insured s premises were injured by breathing poisonous fumes from an accidental fire on the insured s premises Explain whether each of the following liability losses incurred by Boilermaker Inc a manufacturer would be covered by the firm s CGL Boilermaker sold one of its factories without revealing to the buyer a latent re hazard of which Boilermaker was aware As a result of the latent hazard the building caught re several months later after the buyer occupied the factory and the buyer won a judgment against Boilermaker Boilermaker sold a heating system made by Boilermaker in the United States to a customer in Sweden Following installation the system exploded during operational testing by the buyer killing workers whose survivors won a judgment against Boilermaker in a US court Boilermaker sold a steam boiler to a shopping mall in New Jersey In its first winter of operation the boiler suddenly cracked due to a manufacturing defect The mall had to be closed for one weekend until heat could be restored The mall merchants won a judgment against Boilermaker for loss of income due to the shutdown Loss of income to mall merchants Damage to the boiler Cookie rents one of the three stores in the Sunset Strip Shopping Center and operates a bakery at that location Through Cookie s negligence a re originates in this store damaging the rest of the building and injuring four people Cookie s CGL limits of insurance are 1000000 general aggregate 500000 each occurrence 100000 re damage The general aggregate limit has not been reduced by the insurer s payment of prior damages and medical expenses How much of the damages below will Cookie s CGL pay under Coverage A Damages awarded against Cookie are as follows 200000 for PD to the store rented to Cookie 250000 for PD to the rest of the building 50000 total for BI How is the general aggregate limit affected by the payments above Given the situation described above assume that 375000 rather than 250000 was awarded in damages for PD to other parts of the building What would be the insurer s total payment for all damages Assume that the general aggregate limit had already been reduced to 100000 before the fire What would be the insurer s payment Alpha Pharmaceutical Company Alpha replaced its prior claims made CGL with an occurrence basis CGL Alpha chose not to purchase the supplemental extended reporting period from the claims made insurer believing the basic extended reporting period would meet its needs State whether each of the following claims would be covered under Alpha s prior claims made CGL including its basic ERP If a loss is not covered under the prior policy explain why not Two years after the claimsmade policy period expired claim was first made for an injury that occurred five months after the claimsmade policy expired Three years after the claimsmade policy period expired claim was first made for an injury that occurred and was reported to the insurer two weeks before the claimsmade policy expired
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'