In the Standard Fire Policy, "intentional losses" and "extreme perils that cause catastrophic damage to a large number of policyholders" would be considered examples of:

In the Standard Fire Policy, "intentional losses" and "extreme perils that cause catastrophic damage to a large number of policyholders" would be considered examples of:



Answer: exclusions. "Intentional losses" and "extreme perils that cause catastrophic damage to a large number of policyholders" would be considered examples of exclusions.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

You are riding in Sarah's car when she fails to yield and causes an accident. Which of the following coverages would NOT pay for your injuries?

You are riding in Sarah's car when she fails to yield and causes an accident. Which of the following coverages would NOT pay for your injuries? Answer: Sarah's Collision coverage In the scenario described, if you are riding in Sarah's car when she fails to yield and causes an accident, the coverage that would typically not pay for your injuries would be "Medical Payments Coverage" (MedPay) or "Personal Injury Protection" (PIP), depending on the specific insurance policy and jurisdiction. Here's a breakdown of the relevant coverages and why they may or may not apply: Liability Coverage : This coverage pays for injuries and property damage you cause to others in an accident where you are at fault. Since Sarah is at fault in this scenario, her liability coverage would typically cover injuries to other parties involved in the accident, including you as a passenger in her car. However, it would not cover your injuries. Medical Payments Coverage (MedPay) :
Read more