I am not all that familiar with HO policies but I am not sure it would be a covered cause of loss. If they did i am sure they would subrogate against everyone who installed it, sold it and manufactured it.
Then you have the issue if the pollution exclusion would come into play on those parties policies. Who knows? I am sure it would be challenged? But even before you get to that, is their liability? Contractors had a short supply of sheetrock because of HUrricanes. Reasonably did they have a need to test the sheetrock from foriegn manufacturers? Again, more litigation. Ultimately it will fall on the manufacturers who are over seas so the importers get hit. Any way you look at it it will be a long time before a resolution.
Glad you are a great beliver in insurance even if you don’t entirely understand how it works. Go back & re-read some of the other posts about coverage issues. No such thing as defective materials coverage on your homeowners policy. Maybe you should not judge so quickly yourself.
Most of the Chinese (located) manufacturers and even the suppliers of gypsum for the drywall are actually owned by separately incorporated companies owned by a German parent company (largely Knauf). There may be no assets outside of insurance to satisfy a judgment. Worse, depending on the state laws, pollution exclusions may be upheld. There will not be any cause of action against national Chinese interests anymore than someone could file a lien against the US Treasury for a Ford products liability claim.
Sounds like a good idea, but I doubt that the damage that was caused by the drywall is enough to cover our debt to them. If we demand that they pay for it, they might get pissed and say “Ok, we will pay for that, but we demand that you pay the rest of your debt to us right now, and we are not going to accept the US dollar. We see you have some nice national monuments, perhaps we can make a deal”. We need a diplomatic solution to the problem.
Just curious but I have not seen any defense citing the Homeowner policy exclusion for “latent defect, inherent vice, or any quality in property that causes it to damage or destroy itself” – I’m assuming the the home is one entity, and not a collection of components or is this correct? Can one of you claims or legal types explain why this would not be applicable?
Thanks
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
This is a mess any way you look at it.
I am not all that familiar with HO policies but I am not sure it would be a covered cause of loss. If they did i am sure they would subrogate against everyone who installed it, sold it and manufactured it.
Then you have the issue if the pollution exclusion would come into play on those parties policies. Who knows? I am sure it would be challenged? But even before you get to that, is their liability? Contractors had a short supply of sheetrock because of HUrricanes. Reasonably did they have a need to test the sheetrock from foriegn manufacturers? Again, more litigation. Ultimately it will fall on the manufacturers who are over seas so the importers get hit. Any way you look at it it will be a long time before a resolution.
I feel for the homeowners on this.
Glad you are a great beliver in insurance even if you don’t entirely understand how it works. Go back & re-read some of the other posts about coverage issues. No such thing as defective materials coverage on your homeowners policy. Maybe you should not judge so quickly yourself.
Most of the Chinese (located) manufacturers and even the suppliers of gypsum for the drywall are actually owned by separately incorporated companies owned by a German parent company (largely Knauf). There may be no assets outside of insurance to satisfy a judgment. Worse, depending on the state laws, pollution exclusions may be upheld. There will not be any cause of action against national Chinese interests anymore than someone could file a lien against the US Treasury for a Ford products liability claim.
Sounds like a good idea, but I doubt that the damage that was caused by the drywall is enough to cover our debt to them. If we demand that they pay for it, they might get pissed and say “Ok, we will pay for that, but we demand that you pay the rest of your debt to us right now, and we are not going to accept the US dollar. We see you have some nice national monuments, perhaps we can make a deal”. We need a diplomatic solution to the problem.
Just curious but I have not seen any defense citing the Homeowner policy exclusion for “latent defect, inherent vice, or any quality in property that causes it to damage or destroy itself” – I’m assuming the the home is one entity, and not a collection of components or is this correct? Can one of you claims or legal types explain why this would not be applicable?
Thanks