The Burst Pipe and the Unoccupied Duplex
A Montreal duplex insured under a homeowner's policy has been vacant since the tenant left 95 days ago; the owner, Ms. Tremblay, was preparing it for sale and visited weekly to collect mail. During a January cold snap, a pipe in the upstairs bathroom burst. A neighbour noticed water in the hallway and called the insurer. The adjuster attends 11 days later: the upstairs floor is saturated, mould is visible on the ceiling below, and the water has been running (intermittently, as pressure cycled) for an unknown period. The policy contains a standard vacancy/occupancy condition requiring the insured to notify the insurer if the dwelling is vacant beyond 30 consecutive days, and a clause excluding loss caused by freezing of plumbing while the dwelling is unoccupied unless the insured exercised reasonable care to maintain heat. Ms. Tremblay says she kept the thermostat at 15°C but has no records. The claimed amount is $48,000, including $9,000 for mould remediation.
1. Identify the coverage issues raised by the vacancy and the freezing exclusion, and state what the adjuster must establish before deciding.
Read the worked answer
Two distinct conditions must be separated.
1. Vacancy/occupancy condition. The policy requires notice once the dwelling is vacant beyond 30 consecutive days. Vacancy is a factual question: no occupant, no furniture, no intent to return imminently. Weekly visits to collect mail do not make the dwelling occupied. The adjuster should document the 95-day timeline, the tenant's departure date, the absence of contents, and the listing for sale. If the condition is breached, the insurer's remedy depends on the wording and on the Civil Code of Québec framework: a condition of this kind is generally treated as a condition of coverage or a duty whose breach may suspend or reduce the insurer's obligation, not automatically void the contract. The adjuster must read the precise clause rather than assume forfeiture.
2. Freezing exclusion. The exclusion applies only if the dwelling was unoccupied and the insured failed to exercise reasonable care to maintain heat. The burden of proving the exclusion falls on the insurer; the burden of proving the loss falls within coverage falls on the insured. The adjuster needs evidence of the thermostat setting (utility bills, smart-thermostat data, the heating contractor's records), whether the furnace was functioning, and the weather records for the period.
3. Causation and mitigation. The 11-day delay and the mould raise the question of whether part of the damage results from the insured's failure to mitigate after the loss. Under the Civil Code, the insured must act to limit the loss; the insurer is not liable for aggravation attributable to the insured's inaction once the loss is known. But the neighbour's call, not the insured's knowledge, triggered the response, so the adjuster should establish when Ms. Tremblay learned of the leak.
Only after these findings should the adjuster decide whether the claim is payable, reduced, or denied, and communicate the decision in writing with reasons.
2. The mould remediation is $9,000 of the claim. How should the adjuster handle it and what evidence is needed?
Read the worked answer
Mould is treated as a consequential damage flowing from the water loss, not as a separate peril. The adjuster should:
- Establish causation. Obtain a remediation contractor's report identifying the mould species, the extent, and whether growth is consistent with 11 days of standing water in a heated, humid space. Photographs and moisture readings taken at the first attendance are essential.
- Separate covered from uncovered. Remediation of mould caused by the insured peril is generally covered as part of the water damage. Remediation of pre-existing mould, or mould caused by the insured's failure to mitigate after learning of the loss, is not.
- Test reasonableness of the cost. Obtain at least one comparative quote, verify the scope (containment, negative air, disposal, reconstruction), and check whether the $9,000 includes reconstruction that would be payable anyway.
- Apply any mould sublimit. Many homeowner forms contain a specific sublimit for mould remediation; the adjuster must check whether the policy has one and apply it before presenting the number.
The adjuster should not simply pay or deny the mould line; the file should show the causal link between the covered water escape and the fungal growth, and the basis for accepting or trimming the amount.