Gas Disruption –  Losses Claimed 
           The magnitude of the financial losses  arising from the Gas Disruption of 1998 increased daily for 2 weeks.   
          Measures taken as a result, at substantially increased  costs, included:  
          
            - Securing alternate fuels (e.g. LPG, diesel,  etc) and converting plant where possible. 
 
            - Utilising  spare capacity in interstate or overseas operations.
 
            - Purchasing  competitor product to satisfy local demand.
 
            - Conserving  energy when not required.
 
            - Bringing  forward scheduled maintenance.
 
           
          Business Interruption/Consequential  Loss policy cover requires there to be physical damage, referred to as the  Material Damage proviso. 
           If there was no physical damage to  property how did businesses successfully claim under their insurance policies?  | 
          | 
        Public Utilities –  Policy Response  
           There were three major failures of  public services in Australia and New Zealand in 1998 that tested policy  responses and invoked legal responses. 
           In February 1998 Auckland, New  Zealand, was left without electrical power after cables supplying electricity  to the CBD failed. There was no, or limited power, for over 2 weeks and for a  further three months they were subjected to power shortages. Losses were  estimated at NZ$1bn. 
           In July 1998 Sydney’s water supply  was found to be contaminated by giardia and cryptosporidium organisms. Businesses  loss estimates were $100m. 
           Finally, the 25 September 1998 Longford  cut Victoria’s supply of natural gas entirely until mid October 1998. 
           The Mark IV Industrial Special Risks  policy contains a "Public Utilities Extension". Paraphrased this  reads: 
          "Any loss resulting from interruption of ... the Business in consequence  of damage to property, caused by a peril damage as a result of which is insured  hereunder, at any ... gas works... situated on or immediately adjacent to the  Premises shall be deemed to be loss resulting from Damage to Property used by  the Insured at the Premises".  | 
      
      
        Public Utilities - Policy  Response (cont)  
                      While specifically referring to  "gas works" the application of this clause is limited. The "gas  works" must be adjacent to the business which sustained the loss. Broader  Public Utility Extensions existed under manuscript or endorsed covers.  
                      In 20 years we are pleased to say  that Industrial Special Risks policies tend to contain endorsements such as  
          “….Damage,  anywhere in Australia to land based premises of any communication station,  electric power station or sub-station, gasworks, waterworks, sewerage ….” 
           Business Pack Policies slowly  improved their standard wording removing “adjacent to” and replacing it with “Damage to land based property located in  Australia that belongs to or is in under the control of any company or  authority producing, supplying or delivering the electricity, gas, water,  sewerage or communication services used by the business.”  
                      However, most policies contain sub  limits and separate excesses generally based on a time limit such as 2 days or  72 hours.  Application of sub limits and  deductibles have their own complexities but ensuring the cover is available is  the first step. 
                      Cover may also be available under a  Suppliers’ Extension which may read, “Loss  resulting from interruption … with the business in consequence of Damage to  property at Suppliers/Customers Premises shall be deemed to be loss resulting  from Damage to property used by the Insured at the Premises for the purpose of  the Business”. 
                    Insurance policies should be reviewed  to determine if they include endorsements to extensions for Public Utilities with  no reference to “adjacent to”.  They  should extend to cover damage at any public works that interrupts the Insured’s  business.   | 
          | 
        Odd Spot – Chocolate  Spill 
                      Sadly there were no Oomp Loompa’s to  be seen when a truck carrying liquid chocolate overturned on a Polish highway,  blocking six lanes of traffic. 
                      The fire brigade of Slupca reported the  liquid chocolate was solidifying as it cooled and the smeared chocolate was  “worse than snow” and harder than oil stains to remove.  Apparently it took large amounts of hot water  to clear. 
          After wondering if  the chocolate was correctly tempered, we concluded it was a sticky claim for  which we’re sure we would have had a sweet solution.  
            
            
            
            
		  
          Claim Solutions Pty Ltd 
            ABN 31 091 028 072 
            Level 8, 350 Collins Street 
            Melbourne   Vic 3000 
            03 9642 8578 
            claimsolutions.com.au 
          This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
		   
		               |