분류 | 상법 |
---|
Hello,
We have an Employee Dishonesty claim to make against our insurance company for a fraud case involving our (now former) employees. There are about 15 individuals who committed fraud against us, but the insurance company is grouping up the incidents as one occurrence and only willing to submit payment for only one occurrence. We believe that each case should be treated as own and not grouped together, as the employees were not working together, but worked alone and in different times / locations to obtain personal benefits at the cost of the company. Our insurance company is fighting back on this stating that this is on their policy:
d. All loss or damage:
(1) Caused by one or more persons; or
(2) Involving a single act or series of acts;
is considered one occurrence.
Our question is, how is it even determined whether something is considered one occurrence or not? The language is very unclear and vague and could possibly mean anything can be grouped under one occurrence. We would like to see is there's a possibility of fighting this and winning the case if we were to take legal action and hire a lawyer.
Thank you!
번호 | 분류 | 제목 | 글쓴이 | 조회 수 |
---|---|---|---|---|
268 | 민법 | 옆집주인이 보상해줄 생각을 안해요 [1] | 억울 | 172 |
267 | 민법 | 고소할 사람의 주소를 모를때...어떻하나요? [1] | 누렁 | 1602 |
266 | 민법 | 전기업체와 계약없이 작업을 했는데 비용을 너무 과도하게 고지를 해서 법률상담 드립니다. [1] | 뿡뿡이 | 142 |
265 | 부동산법 | Office building Lease Renewal [1] | realeastatepro | 588 |
264 | 부동산법 | 주거용 아파트 임대 계약 관련 질문 [1] | iulius36 | 163 |
263 | 부동산법 | Housemate (sub-tenant) 가 자살한 경우 lease, liability, etc. 관련 질문 [1] | gwhhew23525 | 137 |
262 | 상법 | Lease Agreement. | eric98 | 232 |
261 | 소송 | 자동차 개인 거래 후 차 고장 [1] | Alice | 598 |
260 | 상법 |
Executor of estate
[1] ![]() | 부동산 | 125 |
259 | 상법 | 알고 싶습니다 [1] | Umchu | 4198 |
258 | 상법 | 다른 회사가 이미 쓰고 있는 상품명을 상품의 분야가 전혀 다른곳에서 쓸수 있는지요? [1] | minjoo | 162 |
257 | 기타 | conflict of interest 문제 [1] | 엔지니어 | 302 |
256 | 소송 | 어떻게 해야하는지.. [1] | hellkind | 131 |
255 | 기타 | 아파트복도에서 넘어져서 다쳤어요 [1] | 5G | 313 |
254 | 상법 | 비지니스 매매시 [1] | monegi | 517 |
253 | 소송 | 자동차 화재 사고 처리 문의 드립니다. [1] | shinee | 81 |
252 | 상법 | 자동 연장 해지 | seany | 97 |
251 | 민법 | 자동차 분실 및 보상 문제 | YAC | 89 |
250 | 상법 | Three days notice to pay or quit [1] | Pleasegod | 191 |
249 | 부동산법 | purchase home sellers not disclose solar [1] | cris | 129 |
In responding to your inquiry, please be advised that the attorney must have an opportunity to review the coverage policy to answer to your question. Generally, the coverage policy should define the terms used in the coverage. Yes, I agree with you that many cases the terms and the wordings used are ambiguous. That is why you need to hire an attorney who specializes in reviewing the insurance policy.
You can probably find a qualified attorney through online research. Sorry I am not able to assist you much.
Good luck to you.