FIRE INSURANCE

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 8, 31 March 1927, Page 11

FIRE INSURANCE

QUESTION OF RISKS 1 An unusual case was taken before Mr. Justice Stringer in the Supreme ufourt yesterday when John Cook, Christian Adolph lvraack, and George Mark Erceg (Mr. MeVeagh), sought to recover £275 from the New Zealand Insurance Company (Mr. Richmond), in pursuance of a policy on a fiveroomed dwelling at Henderson. It was stated that the original policy was issued in the name of Charlotte E. Crowe. On August 5, 1925, the defendant company entered into an agrement with Crowe and the plaintiffs whereby the benefits of the policy were transferred to plaintiffs. Fire destroyed the house in 1926, but the company had refused to pay out on the policy. Although £l4O had been paid into Court this sum was regarded as not being sufficient. The question at issue was whether intention to remove a building reduced its value for fire insurance purposes, as the defence* was that the property of 25 acres on which the house stood was advertised for sub-division and the house for removal. After the luncheon adjournment, and when considerable evidence had been called, Mr. McVeagh intimated that an arrangement had been arrived at, and that no judgment was asked for. Mr. Richmond said the company intended to pay what its assessor considered equitable indemnity, and not rely upon the commission of a technical offence. His Honor expressed the opinion that the company had taken a proper course. -