CGL Form Changes FAQ.3

Do you charge an additional premium for adding the Designated Location and Project Site General Aggregate Endorsements?
Currently, pricing is based on the Each Occurrence Limit provided and the exposure. For example, a schedule of locations is usually priced per location while contractors are priced based on revenue. Adding the endorsement will not result in increased rates simply because of the implementation of a General Aggregate Limit.


If Electronic Data is excluded and not considered part of the Named Insured’s product (as it is not a tangible product), how can the insured’s data be protected?
Some property forms, e.g., EDP endorsements, Valuable Papers coverage, may provide coverage for re-creation of data if destroyed or damaged by an insured peril. Liability coverage may be available through a specialty market if the insured has liability exposures where their product can cause damage to, corruption, or loss of data (computer viruses & worms), web hacks and computer break-ins to steal proprietary information or confidential customer information. Your underwriter can give you names of insurers who may write this“cyber” or “media” liability coverage.

The IBC automobile exclusion now excludes loading and unloading. We are concerned that this may create a gap in coverage for our clients because coverage that was previously available under the CGL may not be as a result of the change. In addition, if the SEF 30 (attached machinery exclusion) is added to the automobile policy, there will be no coverage under the auto policy either. How is ING addressing this issue?
ING did not adopt the IBC restriction to the auto exclusion, with respect to loading & unloading or alter our intent. The exclusion in our CGL wording applies to the operation of attached machinery where this is dependent upon operation of the automobile. For example, liability from injury/damage caused by a plough attached to a tractor will be covered under the automobile policy and not the CGL policy. If, however, injury/damage were to arise from the negligent operation of a crane attached to a vehicle, and because of the operator’s negligence, an item fell and injured a passerby or damaged property, the CGL would respond. (Note that damage to the product being lifted is excluded from the standard CGL wording).


What if the automobile coverage is with ING and the CGL is with another company who is adopting the new IBC wording?
To ensure that your client is not faced with any gap in coverage involving attached machinery, it is recommended that the automobile and CGL be placed with the same carrier unless the intent of both carriers is the same.


As mentioned in your presentation, can you explain what "concurrent causation" language means?
Prior to the recent Derksen decision, the courts generally followed the rule that if a loss was caused by covered and excluded events, then the entire loss was excluded. In the Derksen decision however, the court held that the CGL wording did not state this. If the intent is to exclude a loss if it is caused concurrently with one that is not excluded, underwriters have to draft specific language to this effect. ING has added the concurrent causation language to automobile, fungi, terrorism, asbestos and war risks exclusions because we do not intend to
cover losses arising out of these types of events, whether they are the proximate cause or a contributing cause of the event.