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

Drexell White & Gayle Koyanagi v. Norfolk & Dedham Mutual Fire Insurance Company

Held March 13, 2008 - Docket No. INS-08-2017
Decision Issued: March 24, 2008

The insured requested a hearing to appeal the cancellation of a homeowners policy because the dwelling is under construction and not occupied. The company cited physical changes in the insured property and argued that the construction and lack of occupancy are uninsurable as an HO-3.

Held: For the insured. The company did not specifically identify the nature of the change it cited, but the insured demonstrated that the property had sustained a total fire loss and is being rebuilt. Although the commencement of reconstruction was initially delayed, the time frame in which completion is anticipated is not unreasonable. The company did not explain how this condition renders the property uninsurable. The change in occupancy does not constitute a physical change in the property, therefore that change does not fall under section 3049(5).