Hurricane, Surge, and the Code-Upgrade Gap
The Delgados own a coastal South Carolina home insured on an HO-3 with Coverage A $800,000, a 2% hurricane deductible, and a $5,000 all-other-perils deductible. In September a Category 2 hurricane brings 100 mph wind and a 4-foot storm surge. Wind tears off shingles and opens the roof over the master bedroom; rain pours in, ruining ceilings and a hardwood floor, $95,000 in replacement cost. The surge floods the ground floor, causing $180,000 in damage to walls, floors, and furniture. The town later adopts a new elevation ordinance; rebuilding to code will add $60,000 that the pre-loss structure did not require. The Delgados have no flood policy and no ordinance-or-law endorsement. Their neighbor's 12-year-old was injured in the driveway while helping clear debris, and the neighbor threatens a liability claim. The Delgados also have a $1 million personal umbrella that requires underlying Coverage E of $300,000; their HO-3 shows Coverage E $300,000.
1. Allocate the $95,000 wind/rain loss and the $180,000 surge loss between the HO-3 and flood coverage, and calculate the deductible that applies to the covered wind loss.
Read the worked answer
The HO-3 covers wind damage and rain that enters through an opening the wind created; that is the $95,000 item. The 4-foot surge is flood, which the HO-3 excludes; without a flood policy, the $180,000 is uninsured. The hurricane deductible is 2% of Coverage A = 0.02 × $800,000 = $16,000. It applies to the covered wind/rain loss: $95,000 − $16,000 = $79,000. The $5,000 all-other-perils deductible does not also apply; the hurricane deductible replaces it for a hurricane loss. The excluded flood loss carries no deductible because it is not paid. If the carrier could not separate wind from surge, the anti-concurrent causation language in the form might exclude the entire loss, but these facts separate the causes. NFIP limits ($250,000 building/$100,000 contents for a residential unit) would have been enough for the building portion here but not necessarily for all contents and code costs.
2. Explain whether the $60,000 code-upgrade cost is covered and what endorsement or policy would address it.
Read the worked answer
Ordinance or law is excluded under the unendorsed HO-3. The $60,000 elevation upgrade is not 'damage' from the hurricane; it is a cost created by the town's later ordinance, and the policy does not pay to bring a pre-loss structure into compliance with a new code. The insured bears it. The fix is an ordinance-or-law endorsement, which typically provides a percentage of Coverage A for undamaged portions, damaged portions, and demolition/debris; a 10% endorsement would give $80,000 on this policy, enough for the $60,000. Some carriers offer 25%; the agent should compare. A flood policy may also include an ICC (increased cost of compliance) benefit, but NFIP ICC is limited and applies to flood, not wind. The absence of both endorsements is a real gap, not a claim-handling issue.
3. The neighbor's 12-year-old was injured while helping clear debris. Identify the coverage parts that could respond and one fact that would change the analysis.
Read the worked answer
Coverage E (personal liability) and Coverage F (medical payments) are the likely responders. If the child was helping at the Delgados' request, the claim is premises/operations negligence: was the debris pile unsafe, was the child supervised, was the work suitable for a 12-year-old? Coverage E defends and pays up to $300,000, with the $1 million umbrella above it. Coverage F pays medical bills up to $5,000 without regard to fault, subject to the expected/intended and workers' comp exclusions. One fact changes the analysis: if the Delgados paid the child or hired him as a helper, he may be a 'residence employee,' and workers' compensation or the residence-employee exclusion may apply; if they did not ask him to help, the duty and causation are much harder to prove. The umbrella does not drop down; it responds only after the $300,000 underlying limit is exhausted.