Fire and Loss of Profits: The Economy Test, Average and the Reinstatement Measure
Rayyan Foods Pvt Ltd, a ready-to-eat snacks manufacturer at Nashik, held a Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy on building, plant and stock with a sum insured of Rs 9 crore on a reinstatement value basis and an average clause. The value at risk on that basis was Rs 10.5 crore. It also held a fire loss of profits policy on gross profit with a sum insured of Rs 6 crore and a 12-month indemnity period. A fire on 12 August 2024 destroyed the packing hall; the material damage surveyor assessed the reinstatement cost of the damaged hall at Rs 1.85 crore, the pre-fire depreciated value at Rs 1.32 crore, and the insured proposed instead to build a larger, upgraded hall at Rs 2.30 crore. Production resumed at 60% in month 8. Last audited accounts: turnover Rs 20 crore, gross profit Rs 6.40 crore, insured standing charges Rs 1.5 crore. In the four months to 12 December 2024, standard turnover on trend would have been Rs 8 crore; actual turnover was Rs 3 crore. The insured spent Rs 85 lakh on a third-party line and overtime; without that spend, turnover would have been Rs 1 crore. Standing charges saved: Rs 18 lakh. The insured also claims Rs 12 lakh for its own staff who supervised the temporary line.
1. Compute the gross profit loss payable. Show the increase-in-cost-of-working test and the average clause.
Read the worked answer
Step 1 - gross profit rate. Rs 6.40 crore / Rs 20 crore = 32%.
Step 2 - reduction in turnover. Standard turnover Rs 8 crore less actual Rs 3 crore = Rs 5 crore. Loss of GP = 5 crore x 32% = Rs 1.60 crore.
Step 3 - increase in cost of working (the economy test). Without the spend, turnover would have been Rs 1 crore; with it, Rs 3 crore - so the Rs 85 lakh avoided a Rs 2 crore reduction in turnover. Recoverable expenditure is capped at the GP that would have been earned on that avoided reduction: 2 crore x 32% = Rs 64 lakh. The insured spent Rs 85 lakh to save Rs 64 lakh of gross profit, so only Rs 64 lakh is admissible.
Step 4 - savings. Rs 18 lakh of standing charges not incurred must be deducted, because the policy indemnifies the gross profit actually lost.
Step 5 - the Rs 12 lakh staff claim. Salaries of permanent staff are insured standing charges already inside gross profit and are not an 'increase in cost of working'. Only genuinely additional amounts - overtime, temporary hires, extra wages - qualify. Reject the Rs 12 lakh as claimed and admit only the additional element if separately evidenced.
Sub-total: 1.60 + 0.64 - 0.18 = Rs 2.06 crore.
Step 6 - average. GP sum insured Rs 6 crore against GP at risk for 12 months (32% x Rs 20 crore = Rs 6.40 crore) = 93.75%. Payable = 2.06 x 0.9375 = Rs 1.93 crore, less policy excess.
Reserve, do not close: the indemnity period runs to 12 August 2025 and production was still only 60% in month 8. Reserve for months 5-12 on the emerging shortfall and review quarterly.
2. How should the material damage claim be settled, given the reinstatement basis, the Rs 1.85 crore figure and the insured's Rs 2.30 crore proposal?
Read the worked answer
The reinstatement value clause replaces the depreciated measure with the cost of reinstating to a condition equal to but not better than when new, provided the insured actually reinstates within the stipulated period (usually 12 months, extendable). Three controls apply:
1. Measure. Rs 1.85 crore is the reinstatement cost of the damaged packing hall. The Rs 2.30 crore proposal is for a larger, upgraded hall - betterment is not recoverable, so the Rs 45 lakh difference is excluded. If the insured does not reinstate, the claim reverts to the indemnity basis, i.e. the pre-fire depreciated value of Rs 1.32 crore.
2. Sum insured and average. With a value at risk on the reinstatement basis of Rs 10.5 crore against a sum insured of Rs 9 crore, the average clause applies at 85.71%: 1.85 crore x 0.8571 = Rs 1.585 crore, less policy excess. The sum insured must be adequate for the whole of the insured property, not just the damaged hall, so partial reinstatement does not reduce the average factor.
3. Payment mechanics. Pay in stages against progress - an advance on account after the contract is let, the balance on completion - supported by the architect's or engineer's certificate and paid invoices. Note that reinstatement does not automatically reinstate the sum insured; if the policy contains no reinstatement-of-sum-insured clause, the cover reduces by each payment.
The stock component of the fire claim is separate and is settled on an indemnity/market value basis, not on reinstatement. Keep the two settlements in separate files with separate average calculations.
3. Reconstruction took seven months rather than the planned four, and by month 8 output was only 60%. How does this affect the reserve, and which policy provisions govern?
Read the worked answer
The loss of profits policy indemnifies the loss sustained during the indemnity period, not merely while the material damage is being repaired, so the file must stay open for the full 12 months.
Provisions that govern:
- Trend clause: standard turnover for the whole indemnity period must be adjusted for the trend of the business in the 12 months before the fire (here roughly 5% growth), not just for the first four months.
- Increase in cost of working: costs incurred in months 5-12 must each be tested against the economy cap in the same way as the Rs 85 lakh spend, and each tested for whether it is additional rather than a standing charge.
- Duty to mitigate / reasonable dispatch: the policy does not impose a fixed rebuild deadline, but the insured must act with reasonable dispatch. If the seven-month delay was caused by the insured's own indecision or an unrelated contractor dispute, the insurer can argue that part of the extended loss was not caused by the fire. Obtain the contractor's programme, minutes and correspondence.
- Auditors' clause: the claim should be adjusted on the insured's books and certified by the auditors; request a certification of turnover and standing charges for the indemnity period.
Reserve: extend the reserve to cover months 5-12 on the latest actuals, review quarterly, and do not close at month 4.
Revisit the average: if turnover has grown 5% and the GP rate is stable, GP at risk becomes about Rs 6.72 crore against a sum insured of Rs 6 crore, deepening the under-insurance to 89.3% and increasing the average deduction on the balance of the claim.