The need to read the entire policy

This is the second most asked question to me, over the past few weeks. Normally, I would have posted this earlier, but I am over in the UK with fingers crossed I get to fly home on Friday. As I am moving around, trying to avoid getting infected myself, I have had terrible internet, non existent in some places.

Here is a typical question on the topic.

G’day Allan, thanks for taking the time to address this confusion (See https://www.allanmanning.com/quarantine-act-v-biosecurity-act/ ), it’s greatly appreciated.

We have identified an error in the [name withheld] Pack policy wording, the exclusion reads as follows;

4.  Infectious disease, etc.
We will also pay You for interruption or interference with Your Business due to closure or evacuation of the whole or part of the Premises during the Period of Insurance:

a) by order of a competent government, public or statutory authority as a result of vermin or pests or defects in the drains or other sanitary arrangements, occurring at the Premises;

b) as a result of the outbreak of a notifiable human infectious or contagious disease occurring within a 20 kilometre radius of the Premises;

c) as a result of injury, illness or disease caused by the consumption of food or drink supplied at or from Your Premises during the Period of Insurance;

d) as a result of murder or suicide occurring at the Premises; or

e) as a result of shark or crocodile attack occurring within a 20 kilometre radius of the Premises during the Period of Insurance.
 
However, there is no cover under extra cover 4. a. and c. due to Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza in Humans or any other disease declared to be a quarantinable disease under the Quarantine Act 1908 (including amendments).
 
This write back (exclusion) should apply to 4(a)…but it doesn’t.

We both know the ‘intention’ here, but the wording is the wording…your thoughts?

Kind regards,

Steve [surname and email provided]

The issue, is that notifiable disease that is in some policies I have looked at. And believe me, using LMI PolicyComparison.com, I have read a lot of policies :). I have found a definition for “infectious disease”, under the definitions section of the policy, and this usually knocks out any notifiable disease, and so they do not repeat it again.

However, there are a few that I have found repeated, and Steve found here that there is no such definition, and the insurer has made a mistake in the number in the policy. Interesting that a similar policy, by the same insurer, has it correct but wrong in the one above.

This is not the first nor the last policy that has an error that potentially creates a major problem for an insurer.

There are two lessons learned from this:

1. You always need to read the policy. And I read them cover to cover, when I work on any claim. So much is at stake, and I never assume anything.
2. No matter how good you are, it is possible to make a mistake. Every major drafting job I do, or one of our team do, here at LMI, is that we do at least one peer review, often two. We also offer this as a service, as we do policy drafting.

The COVID-19 is going to be a game changer at so many levels.

If you are still not sure, I can always read the policy for you. But on the sheer volumes, I do ask you to follow this.

The key issue is that we all keep safe.