[StBernard] Senate Bill 7

[Westley Annis]

Just looked at Senate Bill 7, introduced by State Senator Quinn.

In essence it will prevent insurance companies from simply using a water
mark to determine whether damage is from flood or not.

The digest of the bill is below.  From my understanding it looks like a good
bill.  Take a look at it and if you agree with it then contact Sen. Boasso,
Rep. Hutter, and Rep. Odinet and urge them to support it also.  I'm sending
an email to all three asking for their stance on it and will let you know
once I get a response.

The full legislation can be read here:
<"http://www.legis.state.la.us/billdata/byinst.asp?sessionid=061ES&billid=SB
7&doctype=BT">

Sen. Boasso - <"mailto:boassow at legis.state.la.us">

Capitol Office
P.O. Box 94183
Baton Rouge, LA 70804
(225) 342-2040

District Office
P.O. Box 94183
Baton Rouge, LA 70804
(504) 270-9258
---
Rep. Nita Hutter - <"mailto:larep104 at legis.state.la.us">
Room 809 
State Capitol 
Baton Rouge, LA 70804 
(TEMPORARY LOCATION) 
(504)361-6684 
(504)279-7193 (fax)
---
Rep. Ken Odinet - <"mailto:larep103 at legis.state.la.us">
127 Hwy. 22 East Suite S7 
Madisonville, LA 70447 
(985)845-1205 
(985)845-3052 (fax)


Westley

--Digest--
Proposed law, relative to homeowners' insurance, provides that it is against
public policy to
deny any claim for damages not covered under the terms of the insurance
policy if a part of
the damage to the immovable is covered under the terms of such policy.

Proposed law prohibits an insurer from using the floodwater mark as
exclusive proof on
which to deny a claim, in whole or in part, for damages covered under a
homeowner's policy.
Prohibits an insurer from using the fact that a home is removed or displaced
from its
foundation, either in whole or in part, as a result of, or during, a
hurricane event, as exclusive
proof on which to deny a claim, in whole or in part, for damages covered
under a
homeowner's policy.

Proposed law provides that if damage to the immovable is due to a cause
covered, in whole
or in part, under the terms of the insurance policy and a cause not covered
under such terms,
then the insurer bears the burden to establish that portion of the damage
that is not covered
under the terms of the insurance policy. Provides that any clause,
condition, term, or other
provision, including any anti-concurrent cause provision, contained in any
policy of
insurance which alters or attempts to alter this burden is null and void and
of no effect.

Proposed law provides that any clause, condition, term or other provision,
including any
concurrent causation provision, which attempts to deny coverage for a damage
claim when
more than one cause contributed to the damage is against the public policy
of this state and
is null and void.

Proposed law provides that any exclusion to the policy must be established
by clear and
convincing evidence.

Proposed law provides that a violation by an insurer shall be subject to
attorney fees, costs
and penalties of three times the amount of the loss or damages covered by
the policy.

Provides that proposed law is to be applied retroactively and prospectively.
Effective upon signature of the governor or lapse of time for gubernatorial
action.