Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club-Interpretation ' Loss to a Pair or Set" by: Anonymous
March 2010- Adjuster response to us:In your email dated March 13, 2010, you have cited the "Loss to a Pair or Set" clause in the policy in support of your position. By its terms, the "Loss to a Pair or Set" provision applies to items of property that reasonably can be characterized as being part of a "pair" or "set" (such as a pair of vases or set of dishes). Wall-to-wall carpeting cannot reasonably be characterized as being part of "pair" or "set," and the "Loss to a Pair or Set" provision therefore has no application to items of building property. In your email, you also mention a Minnesota statute (Minn. Sat. 72a.201)and a Minnesota district court case which you be believe support your position that Intersurance Exchange is obligated to pay the cost of replacing the carpet. We have checked with our counsel-and "Minnesota district court case to which you referred was not certified for publication, which means the decision is not "case law" in Minnesota (or in any other state). More important, Minnesota statutes and Minnesota court decisions (whether or not certified for publication) are not blinding in California. Based on Section 2695.9 of the Fair Settlement Practices Reg, we are not obligated. Section 2695.9 - When a loss requires replacement of items and the replaced items do not match in quality, color or size, the insurer shall replace all items in the damaged area so as to conform to a reasonably uniform appearance.Instead, we are only obligated to pay for the cost of providing a "reasonably uniform appearance" in the damaged are (the dinning room. You have mentioned a :line of sight" concept in some of your prior communications. The Department of Insurance abandoned the "line of sight" concept quite a few years ago and replaced it with the "reasonably uniform appearance" that set forth in the current Regulations. ....We have been with this insurance company for 15 years and was never provide any information about" The Department of Insurance abandoned the "line of sight to reasonably uniform appearance".
