|
|
|
|
|
|
| IHG Insurance (National Insurance Provider) |
| Providing Community Association Insurance for over 25 years: D&O Liability, Crime Products, Umbrella Coverage and Property Manager's Errors & Omissions Liability. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
| Author |
Messages |
|
WilliamT
(Arizona)
Posts:489
 |
| 07/18/2006 8:56 AM |
|
I just received a page from my insurance company in my renewal package that deals with "Viciousl Dogs and Dogs with Prior Bite History, Liability Exclusion that I think may be interesting to people who were interested in what breeds are considered "vicious".
Here is the Definitions as spelled out by AAA insurance company.
With respects to this exclusion, the following words and phrases are defined as follows:
1. "Vicious dogs" means a dog with ancestyryu properly classified as any of the following breeds of dogs.
1. Chow
b. Doberman
c. Pit Bull or Pit Bull mix
d. Presa Canario
e. Rottweiler
f. Wolf Hybrid or Wold Dog.
2. "Dogs with prior bite history" means any dog that has caused "bodily injury", whether or not covered by insurance, on one or more occasions prior to the date of the loss for which coverage is sought.
Questions for thought:
1. Does your association insurance have a "Vicious Breed Dog" exclusion? I'll be checking with our agent.
2. If yes, then if an owner has a vicious breed dog, and it bites someone, can the association be sued for allowing the dog in the community?
3. Would it be good idea for all associations to have the "vicious Breed Dogs" not allowed, in their CC&R's or Rules?
Bill |
|
|
|
|
BrianB
(California)
Posts:1748
|
| 07/19/2006 7:16 AM |
|
i find it interesting that a Chow is classified by the insurance company, but not chow mixes. You could say "they meant mixes", but they very specifically call out Pit Bulls and Pit Bull Mixes... so if they didn't specify it on the others, then they don't mean it. Only pit bull mixes are aggressive and dangerous/banned.
So, if you use these rules (and I do agree with the previous biter rule.. absolute solid rule, very defendable in court), then I could have my half chow/half lab, but you could not have your 15/16th Pomeranian, 1/16th American Bull Terrier...
Yeah!
I wonder, could I have a half chow, half doberman? After all, it's not a chow, and it's not a doberman by breed, so it isn't captured by the exclusion, correct? It's a chow mix, or a Dobie mix, and those aren't banned.
|
|
|
|
|
BrianB
(California)
Posts:1748
|
| 07/19/2006 7:19 AM |
|
to answer number 2 and 3 questions:
If you association has a rule, and it isn't enforced (we ban certain dogs by rule, but didn't really enforce it and the dog bit someone), yes, i believe a lawsuit could be successful (really, anyone can be sued for any reason... what you really are asking is "could it be successful"). Yes, by having the rule and not enforcing it, you could be building risk and liability.
So, should you have a rule? Only if you will enforce it. It's better to NOT have a rule, if you aren't going to enforce it, than have one that you don't enforce. |
|
|
|
|
WilliamT
(Arizona)
Posts:489
|
| 07/19/2006 8:50 AM |
|
Brian,
You bring up some excellent points regarding vicious dog breeds and the potential effect of having a rule and not enforcing it.
I haven't seen any of these breeds of dogs in our neighborhood. We see a lot of dogs from the lakeside because they like to bark at passing boats, but most of them are poodles, yorkies, labs, and other typical friendly breeds.
The only problem we have is a rare complaint from a neighbor about a dog barking that the neighbor considers a nuisance.
Since there is city ordinance where the Police have a program to deal with barking dog complaints, and there is also a Solve-It mediation process available, we will soon be telling anyone who files a barking dog complaint that they must first go through the Gilbert Police barking dog program.
If the Police find the dog owner guilty of creating a nuisance, then they can bring the Police Determination to us as that is proof that a nuisance does exist and we can take board action.
Otherwise it is too difficult for a board to determine if the barking is a nuisance.
However, we will recommend that as an option to the Police plan, that both neighbors go to the Solve-It mediation program so the whole situation can be resolved in a win win situation and the neigbors stand a better chance of becoming friendly neighbors.
I'll check with the AAA agent and see if he can get more information on why the vicious dog categories did not contain more mixes. It may be of help to anyone who is considering a vicious dog rule.
Bill |
|
|
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
General Legal Notice: The content of forum messages are from the posting member and have not been reviewed nor endorsed by HOATalk.com. Messages posted by HOATalk or other members are for informational purposes only, are not legal or professional advice and do not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. HOATalk is not a licensed attorney, CPA, tax advisor, financial advisor or any other licensed professional. HOATalk accepts ads from sponsors but does not verify sponsor qualifications nor endorse/guarantee any sponsor's product or service.
HindmanSanchez Legal Notice: (For messages posted by HindmanSanchez) This message has been prepared by HindmanSanchez for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Members of HOATalk.com should not act on this information without seeking professional counsel. Please do not send us confidential information unless you speak with one of our attorneys and get authorization to send that information to us. If you wish to initiate possible representation, please contact an attorney in our firm. Our attorneys are licensed to practice law in the state of Colorado only.
Legal Notice For Messages Posted by Sponsoring Attorneys: This message has been prepared by the sponsoring attorney for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Readers of HOATalk.com should not act on this information without seeking professional counsel. Please do not send any sponsoring attorney confidential information unless you speak with the sponsoring attorney or an attorney from the sponsoring attorney’s firm and get authorization to send that information to them. If you wish to initiate possible representation, please contact an attorney in the firm of the sponsoring attorney. Sponsoring attorneys that post messages here are licensed to practice law in a specific state or states as indicated in their message signature or sponsor’s profile page. (NOTE: A ‘sponsoring attorney’ is an attorney that is a HOATalk.com official sponsor and is identified as such in the posted message or on our sponsor page.)
|
|