Skip Maine state header navigation

Agencies | Online Services | Help

Skip All Navigation

Maine.gov > PFR Home > Insurance Regulation > Cancellation Hearing Index > Cancellation / Nonrenewal Docket No. INS 05-2028 Decision

 

Archives: 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008

 

Berl Nisbet v. Patrons Oxford Insurance Company
Docket No. INS-05-2028, Decision Issued August 15, 2005.
 
The insured requested a hearing following receipt of a notice of homeowners insurance coverage nonrenewal citing certain conditions of the property and failure to comply with loss control recommendations. At hearing, the company representative testified that an inspection revealed various concerns and a recommendation letter was sent to the insured at the beginning of 2005. She stated that the agent had several conversations with the insured in the spring which indicated that the insured was unwilling to comply with certain of the recommendations. The insured’s wife discussed the insured’s responses to the recommendations.
Held: For the company. The company’s reasons for nonrenewal were that the insured failed to comply with loss control recommendations and also that the cited issues increase the hazards insured against. The evidence demonstrates that three reasonable loss control recommendations were conveyed to the insured in January 2005. Although the insured signed a statement on May 12, 2005, confirming that he had complied with the recommendations, certain recommendations have not been met. The insured has made efforts toward one of the recommendations but the condition continues to present an increased liability exposure. While the insured maintained that failure to attend to another condition was due to the structure’s impending demolition, more than six months have elapsed since the company advised repairs. There is no evidence that any attempt has been made to secure the problem area. Accordingly, the insured has not complied with at least two of the company’s reasonable loss control recommendations, thus meeting the requirements of § 3049(10). In addition, the company has demonstrated that the condition of the property due to these issues increases the hazards insured against, and therefore, is a good faith reason related to the insurability of the property.


Return to Cancellation / Nonrenewal Hearing Decisions

Last Updated: July 16, 2008