"Ron" wrote in message ...


Hank Oredson wrote:
"Ed Price" wrote in message
news:Ifpye.27243$ro.18610@fed1read02...

"John" wrote in message
news:Wkmye.61939$%Z2.8135@lakeread08...

If an agent, a representative of an insurance company, sells and the
company accepts a property then anything that happens (if fortuitous, or
accidental) to that property is covered as long as it falls within the
policy language, perils insured against and property covered.

The company can't come back AFTER a loss and deny payment because of
something not defined in the policy. They can't just make it up after
the fact.

73

I'll bet that there's "language in the policy" that is sufficiently vague
and flexible such that the company can stretch a loophole for anything
that it wants. Maybe I'm too paranoid, but the insurance company expects
that an insured property is a normal and typical example of materials and
construction, and that due care was applied to the design. Further, the
property should be in compliance with local existing building codes and
standards.

If you wired half your house with lamp cord, never got a permit, and have
no record of inspection, do you think the company agent should know this
by himself? If the loss is big enough, and especially if there's some
unusual circumstances (fire inspector's report, neighbor's claims), then
the company's lawyers have plenty of room to work in. You may have the
utmost confidence in your own workmanship, but, if the insurance company
is trying to avoid a $500k claim, all they have to do is say "no." So
then what happens? You take the insurance company to court, and they ask
you about your experience in soils engineering, concrete construction,
structural engineering, calculation of wind loading, welding
certifications, experience with lightning protection, etc. They will cut
you up into very small pieces.

Everything unusual about your property should be defined, and if your
agent is still eager to sell you a policy despite your "creative
engineering", then I would start to wonder why the agent is so desperate
to sell policies.



Um ... let me guess ... you don't carry a general liability rider?
Or if you do, you were not careful to read the details?

They are not expensive, and will cover anything ... and can even
cover intentional neglegence by the owner. Every ham with a tower
(or a pool, or horses, or a big dog, or ...) should have one.


Yes but you need everything first insurance with one company and then at
the maximum but the minimums. You pay dearly for a general liability
rider if you take it all into account. Yes you are protected.


Hank, those general riders are expensive, and no, I don't have one. OTOH, I
am not erecting a 75' tower, made with two dissimilar structural systems,
joined together by amateur engineering and welding, a very minimal concrete
base, and held in place with guy wires running to nearby trees and an
illegal encroachment onto someone else's property. The OP wanted our opinion
of his efforts; he got 'em. The extent of my insurance coverage has
absolutely no bearing on the subject of AD5TH's tower project.

--
Ed
WB6WSN
El Cajon, CA USA