In the case of an earthquake damaging individual condo units, how is the “origin” of the damage established?
Get Legal Help Today
Compare Quotes From Top Companies and Save
Secured with SHA-256 Encryption
In the case of an earthquake damaging individual condo units, how is the “origin” of the damage established?
The by-laws only cover 2 options, the origin must be either the unit or the common elements. Since the individual units are built on top of the garages (common elements), could it be argued that the common elements were the origin since the ground (which is also a common element) shook and caused damage inside the units. What happens if neither the unit nor the common elements are declared as the origin (i.e. act of God)?
Asked on October 17, 2011 under Insurance Law, Virginia
Answers:
M.T.G., Member, New York Bar / FreeAdvice Contributing Attorney
Answered 12 years ago | Contributor
Okay let's start from the beginning. An Act of God is a term used in the insurance world to signify natural disasters. And you are correct in your back door conclusion here that natural disasters are generally excluded from coverage under insurance policies, which is generally why you see the Federal Government jump in with disaster aid. Without being able to read the policy and paperwork you refer to I am fairly certain that IF there was an earthquake and that caused damage to the garage and then to the condos above, the earthquake would be considered the origin here. The structural soundness of the garage may not have an bearing in this set of facts. Good luck.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The Answer(s) provided above are for general information only. The attorney providing the answer was not serving as the attorney for the person submitting the question or in any attorney-client relationship with such person. Laws may vary from state to state, and sometimes change. Tiny variations in the facts, or a fact not set forth in a question, often can change a legal outcome or an attorney's conclusion. Although AttorneyPages.com has verified the attorney was admitted to practice law in at least one jurisdiction, he or she may not be authorized to practice law in the jurisdiction referred to in the question, nor is he or she necessarily experienced in the area of the law involved. Unlike the information in the Answer(s) above, upon which you should NOT rely, for personal advice you can rely upon we suggest you retain an attorney to represent you.