New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1913-01-26
ASKS BETTER POLICY;
WANTS LOWER LOSSES
William B. Ellison Urges Changes in Standard
Fire Insurance Forms and Superintendent
Fmmet Would Reduce Fire Waste.

E,nIIlCl w OulO ~
William 3. Ellison declared yesterday
that the standard form Of fire insurance
policy in this state contains a mass Oh
technical conditions and provisions 50
ambiguous that the highest courts oil rec
ord i'm the country constantly diner III
matters of construction. The public well
fare. he added. demanded that this be
rcmedjed at once. The provisions OF the
policy. he said. should be made so clear
that the rights of both insured and com
pany were apparent and their interests
safeguarded.
Mr.. Ellison pointed out that the present
form provides that II fire occur the in
sured shall give immediate nOticcNpt loss
and said:
Now, there can be no objection to this
provision, nor to the following. Which
makes it mandatory on the insured 10
protect the property from further Gam"
age. separate the damaged and undan-
aged personal property. put the same III
good order, and make a complete lnVcn-
tory thereof, stating quantities ana costs
80 far as possible, together win iht
amount claimed thereon. But following
this provision, there is one which makes
it mandatory on tine insured within sixty
DAYS to render a statement or proof OF
loss containing a great deal OF detained
matter.
Now, if the insured omts to present
this statement of proof of loss within
sixty days, his claim is beyond recovery
1t is not infrequently the case-in fact'
it is usually so-that the company 5 du-
juster is Immediately on the scene OF tle
loss and takes up its adjustment. Inc IN
sured trusts the companys representa-
tive and furnishes him with all such
information as he may require. Inc IN
sured, however. forgctful OF the SlNtE
day provision, or believing that the ad-
iuster is protecting his interests in the
matter omits to serve the statement or
proof of loss before referred TO. He then
stands at the mercy OF the insurer
Change Suggested.
This may be readily changed and fur
nish ample protection TO the insured by
providing that such statement or PROOF
OF loss shall be rendered within shy
DAYS only when so required by the IN
surer. II the insurer wants the in1ornld-
tion called for, it is easy for II TO mar
demand therefor. Such demand Wouiu
put the insured Immediately on his guard
and cognizant of the necessity OF com
plying Herewith as the form now readS'
no such demand by the insurer Is nectS-
sary, and over and over again tne III
sured becomes unmindful of his obllsatioil
IN respect thereto and omitS TO lufnlSh
the statement or proof referred TO. rae,
ing the burden on the insurer to demand
il leaves no excuse on the part OF lic
insured for failure so 10 DO. Thousailus
of meritorious claims have been defeated
in the courts by failure TO comply WIN
this provision, hidden away, as II Is, IN
the labyrinth Of techncahtles idrseS
making up the present form of policy.
Let us refer to another phaS" OF TINS
matter. i. G., that provision which pro-
vides that the policy shall be void II the
insured has any other contract OF illsui-
a.. IN ono III
interest OF the insured is other than UNI
conditional and sole ownership, or II the
subject of insurance Is Dulldm~ OH
ground not owned by the insured In Zee
simple or if the subject of insurance Is
personal property and is encountered ny
a Chattel mortgage or if any of the null
titude of things exist at the time OF the
issuance of the policy that by its terms
will void IL. Now. the insured as RUE
is not aware of these technical violations
of his policy.-in fact as rule, not Tor
some days does he get the policy INTO
his possession. Then, generally, he mes
IL away in his safe. Should fire occur
lac has no claim for his insurance
These features of the policy form now
in use have defeated thousands upon
thousands of what would otherwise have
been meritOrious claims Sometimes the
insurer does not take advantage OF ms
position. but the rights OF the insured are
in his hands IL may be charitable or II
may not be- This is not such a situation
as the law should countenance and espe-
Cially is this 80 when we consider that by
a slight amendment to the present policy
form the obligation may be put upon thc
insurer TO interrogate the insured upon
these questions as a condition precedent
to issuing the policy. Many of the highest
courts of record in other Jurisdictions
than in the state Of New York have held
tat under such circumstances and in the
absence of interrogation by the insurer Of
the insured regarding these violations,
nj he fSCIr Of a
of the premiums without interrogation.
estops the insurer from setting them up
as offences Our policy should be
amended so as to set this question at
rest.
Unfair to Insured.
Mr. Ellison spoke of the provision in
rase of fire, that the insured shall. las
often as required" exhibit to any person
designated by Inc company all that re-
mains OF the p bperty, and submit to eX-
aminations under oath by any person
named by the company, and also, as
often as required" shall produce for ex-
animation all books of accounts. bills.
invoices, vouchers, etc. at such place "a
may be designated by the company, and
said:
This provision, in 80 far as il requires
the Insured as often as required W w
the things referred to. is entirely too
broad. IL is true that the insurer should
he given reasonable opportunity TO
make the examinations in question, but II
should not have the power to put the in
sured 10 the trouble and expense thereof
las often as required" IL subjects the
insured TO harassment at the hands OF
the insurer, and not infrequently the OPP
portunity has been taken advantage of.
TSere is also provision that in case
of disagreement between the insurer and
the insured as to the amount of loss. the
insurer may force the insured into an
appraisal thereof. This provision takes
from the insured the right to 90 into
court and try his case in the ordinary
way and i'm the way provided by law for
the disposition of Just such disputes.
There L. no reason why a loss claimant
should be forced TO submit his claim 10
three appraisers unless he is willing so
TO do and the present policy should be
amended so as 10 place that feature Of
the case within his election, leaving him
10 seek his remedy i'm the courts should
ne prefer so to do.
Mr.. Ellison added that the present
standard fire insurance policy's arrange
ment was bad, its language ambiguous.
many parts difficult to reconcile and its
whole plan conducive to a misunder-
standing BY the insured OF his obligations.
1t could we'll be reduced 10 at least one
Nalf OF its present verbiage, he held. and
- ,a,5a -oa1F, a bla nv fua