Policy form language attempts to clarify flooding coverage

Policies for flood and water damage have evolved over the past several years and are written more clearly today, helping to resolve potential conflicts, experts say.

“Some of the coverage issues that arose from Katrina and Sandy have been addressed in more recent policy forms,” said Robert Fisher, a partner with Clyde & Co in Atlanta, noting as an example the clarification of the application of policy sublimits and deductibles in the case of an event that falls within the definitions of both flood and named storm, and more particularly where storm surge occurred.

Even with clearer and more direct policy language, however, natural catastrophes are likely to continue producing areas of disagreement.

“The policy definitions, including wind-driven water and so forth, have been looked at, examined and in some cases revised, but you still have those disputes,” said Kent Adams, regional managing partner of the Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker L.L.P. offices in Houston and Beaumont, Texas.