My mother owns a rental house that she somehow overlooked placing insurance on. The tenants vehicle was worn out when she parked beneath a tree with a rotten member and it fell on her vehicle. The limb is over where on earth she customarily parks however this is not a designated spot and there be plenty of other places to park. She says her insurance won't cover the cost because it be "an act of God". She is insisting my mother money. Is my mother responsible since it was on her property? Help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Answers: An "accomplishment of God" is not an insurance term any longer. The auto insurance will cover falling limb IF she had comprehensive coverage. If she did not enjoy comprehensive she has no coverage for falling limb, falling hail, falling cats and dogs, etc.
Your mother will own to pay lone if she was liable for the upper limb falling. If your mother knew it be dead or rotten and should hold been cut she will be liable. Of course, the tenant have to prove your mother knew, or should hold known, it be rotten. If it looked healthy from the ground she probably won't be liable.
If the appendage was rotten your mother will probably be held liable.
even if she have house insurance they might not have compensated it anyway my insurance agent told us if a tree falls on our home they will send someone out to inspect the tree to see if it be living or dead if it be dead they wouldnt cover the claim.
I live on the north coast of ca among plenty of Redwoods
What does your lease speak? Look at another lease and compare. If the lease says nil, your mom may be stuck.
I found a link near a lease for you to compare. Not true. "Act of God" is not written into ANY insurance policy, one way or another.
If she have "comprehensive" coverage - which is fire, theft, vandalism, broken cup, and falling objects coverage - her auto policy will pick it up.
This is NOT your mother's responsibility. Even if your mom had insurance, it wouldn't repay - it only pays if she's NEGLIGENT. Your mother isn't responsible for the vehicle, regardless of where it's parked. If it be stolen, your mother wouldn't have to earnings for it, either.
In establish for your mother to be found negligent within court, the tenant will have to prove both that the tree be rotten, AND your mother knew something like it and didn't do anything to fix it. The second part is REALLY firm to prove.
Likely, this girl doesn't have insurance on the saloon, just approaching your mom doesn't have insurance on the house.
But in a minute your mom needs to 1. capture insurance on the house and 2. take concern of the tree, because NOW she knows there's a problem beside it.
Unfortunately your mother is responsible.
Answers: An "accomplishment of God" is not an insurance term any longer. The auto insurance will cover falling limb IF she had comprehensive coverage. If she did not enjoy comprehensive she has no coverage for falling limb, falling hail, falling cats and dogs, etc.
Your mother will own to pay lone if she was liable for the upper limb falling. If your mother knew it be dead or rotten and should hold been cut she will be liable. Of course, the tenant have to prove your mother knew, or should hold known, it be rotten. If it looked healthy from the ground she probably won't be liable.
If the appendage was rotten your mother will probably be held liable.
even if she have house insurance they might not have compensated it anyway my insurance agent told us if a tree falls on our home they will send someone out to inspect the tree to see if it be living or dead if it be dead they wouldnt cover the claim.
I live on the north coast of ca among plenty of Redwoods
What does your lease speak? Look at another lease and compare. If the lease says nil, your mom may be stuck.
I found a link near a lease for you to compare. Not true. "Act of God" is not written into ANY insurance policy, one way or another.
If she have "comprehensive" coverage - which is fire, theft, vandalism, broken cup, and falling objects coverage - her auto policy will pick it up.
This is NOT your mother's responsibility. Even if your mom had insurance, it wouldn't repay - it only pays if she's NEGLIGENT. Your mother isn't responsible for the vehicle, regardless of where it's parked. If it be stolen, your mother wouldn't have to earnings for it, either.
In establish for your mother to be found negligent within court, the tenant will have to prove both that the tree be rotten, AND your mother knew something like it and didn't do anything to fix it. The second part is REALLY firm to prove.
Likely, this girl doesn't have insurance on the saloon, just approaching your mom doesn't have insurance on the house.
But in a minute your mom needs to 1. capture insurance on the house and 2. take concern of the tree, because NOW she knows there's a problem beside it.
Unfortunately your mother is responsible.