In determining whether or not to provide insurance to a particular applicant, one thing that insurance companies typically rely on is the insurance application submitted by the prospective insured. The application is designed to provide the insurance company with, among other things, a comprehensive overview of the risk to be insured. Given the importance of

The difference between Actual Cash Value (“ACV”) and Replacement Cash Value (“RCV”), and whether increased costs to comply with building codes are part of RCV can be significant in cases involving a proper loss measurement determination. In Sierra Pacific Power Company v. Ram Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection & Insurance Company, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS

Policies typically require an insured to submit to an Examination Under Oath (“EUO”) at the request of the insurer. The EUO can be a useful tool during claim adjustment in reaching a fair and informed coverage decision by allowing the insured to explain the facts and circumstances surrounding the claimed loss and substantiating valuation of

Property insurance policies typically require that the insured repair or replace the damaged property before recovering on a replacement cost value (RCV) basis.  The difference between RCV versus actual cash value (ACV) can be substantial, especially where an older building is involved.  The Indiana Court of Appeals recently held that an insurer can waive its