In Depth Review of Homeowner Policy Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

In Depth Review of Homeowner Policy - Term Paper Example In Depth Review of Homeowner Policy As a policy holder myself, coverage differs from one policy to another. My homeowner policy covers for several things. It includes the physical property damages. In section 1, coverage A of the policy, it states that it pays for a certain percentage of the structure of the home when physically damaged. Included in this section are the roofing, flooring, light fixtures, appliances, kitchen appliances and washers. The policy also covers for the structures that are part of the main house but are considered extensions like the garage and fences however with a small percentage which is about 10 percent of the cost of the main structure insured. Additional living expenses during the peril of fire or lightning, windstorm or hail and explosions are covered too. This is when the owner seeks for a temporary lodging. It takes 20% reimbursement from the structural coverage of the property. My personal property is also covered but scrutinizing it shows some limitations. Jewelleries when not appra ised and scheduled separately in a policy will not be all covered when stolen. The amount limit to be paid only is $1000 even if the value of the jewelleries is three times the limit. In addition the policy exercises the limit in the China wares, cash, and firearms when stolen. In this connection, it is always best to protect personal properties. According to William (2007) it is advisable not to keep valuables in the bedroom because it is the most part of the house being searched by burglars. What is good in my policy is that it has an extra endorsement to cover for an expensive loss of personal belongings. However, if the insurance company pays the stolen personal properties, it is going to price it with today’s value and not the former price when you purchased that personal belonging before minus the depreciation value. However, to avail of these inclusions, the insurer has to make sure her policy has the broad form or the all peril coverage. Having this type of coverage w ould make the policy holder covered for everything with the exception of those within the exclusion of the policy. Most often, policyholders are tricked with this scheme where they believed there are no exceptions. Insurance companies are very tricky in their business that if there is no review done by the policyholder, he will fall into their trap. An example of this situation is the case of Ward Gen. Ins. Svcs. Inc. vs. Employers Fire Ins. Co. (CBS interactive, 2010) who went into hearing to dispute the payment of her loss regarding her data in the computer. The court found out that the loss was not included in the coverage because it was not a direct physical loss. Physical loss means material existence that is tangible (Viau & Kwasniewski, 2001). To this effect, it is clear that the insurer has also to understand the languages used by the insurance companies. The understanding of the term physical loss in the policy is not in congruent to the definition of the insurance company thus fighting the dispute in court is a disappointment on the policy holder’