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 |
---|---|---|---|---|
398 | 부동산법 | Real Estate disclosure 문제 입니다. [1] | Jerry | 341 |
397 | 소송 | 라디오 코리아에서 남기고 다시남겨요. [1] | clair jeong | 340 |
396 | 소송 | 치과 [1] | jully | 339 |
395 | 기타 | 비지니스 매매후 근처에서 같은일 할경우 문제 되나요? [1] | 뉴요컹 | 335 |
394 | 상법 | 식당 매매 관련하여 문의드립니다 [1] | jason123 | 335 |
393 | 상법 | 코로나상황 관련 룸렌트 계약 취소 [1] | 김예찬 | 331 |
392 | 소송 | 손님한테 물건을 $2000 어치가량 물건을 팔고 체크로 받앗습니다. [1] | daviddaviddavid | 329 |
391 | 상법 | 전자기기 수입하려는데요 [1] | Kim Pil S | 328 |
390 | 민법 | 티켓에 써있는 영어를 잘 해석을 못하겠습니다 [1] | Chloeny | 325 |
389 | 소송 | 변호사님 상담을 받고싶습니다. [1] | Meow | 321 |
388 | 상법 | bank of america [1] | Rornfrornf | 321 |
387 | 상법 | 렌트비 인상 [1] | 노놈 | 319 |
386 | 상법 | 법인회사의 대표자 변경을 할수 있을까요? [1] | Eunice | 317 |
385 | 상법 | 129번의글 TK입니다. [1] | TK | 316 |
384 | 상법 | 이런 경우는 어떤 법에의해 소송할수 있나요? [1] | Candy | 314 |
383 | 부동산법 | Eviction [1] | pvybim | 314 |
382 | 기타 | 도움 요청드림니다 [1] | hello1234 | 314 |
381 | 상법 | 스몰비지니스 계약건 문의드립니다..2 [1] | 밍키엄마 | 313 |
380 | 부동산법 | 편지 [1] | Jean | 312 |
379 | 기타 | 아파트복도에서 넘어져서 다쳤어요 [1] | 5G | 310 |
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.