May 17, 2011
********
*****************
Question re insurance procurement clause
*************
Hey Ken-
We recently updated to your fire and security monitoring contracts and there is one provision I know I am going to get push back from my customers:
The Customer shall maintain a policy of public liability, property damage, burglary and theft insurance under which I/Q and the Customer are named as insured, and under which the insurer agrees to indemnify and hold I/Q harmless from and against all costs, expenses including attorneys' fees and liability arising out of or based upon any and all claims, injuries and damages arising under this agreement, including, but not limited to, those claims, injuries and damages contributed to by I/Q's negligent performance to any degree or its failure to perform any obligation. The minimum limits of liability of such insurance shall be one million dollars for any injury or death, and property damage, burglary and theft coverage in an amount necessary to indemnify Customer for property on its premises. I/Q shall not be responsible for any portion of any loss or damage which is recovered or recoverable by the Customer from insurance covering such loss or damage or for such loss or damage against which the Customer is indemnified or insured.
Typically, it is my customers asking me to maintain certain levels of insurance, naming the customer as additional insuredÂ…. Could you provide some commentary so that I can skillfully address this provision.
Thanks
TC
Waterford, MI
**************
Answer
*************
See this prior article: http://www.kirschenbaumesq.com/earticle597.htm and this one http://www.kirschenbaumesq.com/earticle608.htm
Try and retain the insurance procurement clause, but if you need to omit it to save the deal it's one of the protective clauses that you can omit.
********
another insurance procurement question
******
I think someone may have asked this before, but I would be interested in the ~ percentage of alarm companies that could produce copies of their clients declaration page, showing them as additionally insured? Then, what weight that might have in possible future litigation?
Ray
************
Response
*********
I would guess that most subscribers don't bother to name the alarm company as an additional insured and most alarm companies don't follow up demanding the insurance.
*************
comment on DSC causing problems
************
Hi Ken,
In reference to John Elmore's statement, We use alot of DSC which causes problems with telco line failure especially ip phones"
DSC doesn't cause the problems, he must be causing the problems! I have over 1000 DSC accounts and have never had them cause any telco line faults. Must be hooking them up wrong. If he were to read the technical warnings on their website or call their engineers, he would learn that your only supposed to use 4x2 when using IP! not sia or contact id because that's what causes the problems!
Greg Cholka
Walworth County Security Alarms, LLC