Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] Insurance, and tower as "accessory structure"

To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Insurance, and tower as "accessory structure"
From: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 22:42:34 -0400
List-post: <mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
This is a question of contract law.  Your insurance agent
has the contract in front of him.  It MAY specify that
accessory structures are attached to the house.  Then, again,
would a back yard shed be covered, if a tree fell on it?
Most likely.  This bears professional reading.  

In my case, with a Travellers HO3 policy, an oak tree fell across
the guys of my tower.  The tower was considered an accessory 
structure by the town, which required zoning approval and a
building permit.  

Once I pointed that out, and provided documentation of the value,
the loss, and the permit, Travellers paid.  

Then, they elected not to renew, at the end of the policy.

Be careful what you wish for.  

n2ea



_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>