An applicant says nothing about a fire that destroyed an earlier building at the same location, and the insurer does not ask about it. This is best described as:
Explanation
Concealment is silence about a material fact the applicant knew and had a duty to disclose; a misrepresentation, by contrast, is an untrue statement actually made. Loss history at the very same location is plainly material, since it would change how an underwriter rates or accepts the risk, so calling it immaterial fails. A warranty is a promise written into the contract, not information withheld before it issues.
This topic, taught in full in the California Property & Casualty Broker-Agent guide. California Property & Casualty Broker-Agent Study Guide — 2026 Edition — PDF + EPUB, $24.99 · 14-day refund →
Practice all 531 questions free — no signup required.
Own the complete California Property & Casualty Broker-Agent guide — PDF + EPUB, $24.99 →
Related questions on this topic
- An agent holding binding authority tells an applicant by phone that coverage is in force, and the building burns before any paperwork is issued. The likely outcome is that:
- Mid-term, an insurer broadens the coverage of its standard form without charging more for it. Under the liberalization clause the change:
- The entire contract provision in a property and casualty policy means that:
- Immediately after a covered fire, which action is a duty the policy places on the insured?
- In the claim process, a proof of loss is best described as:
- The insured and the insurer agree the fire loss is covered but cannot agree on what it is worth. Under the appraisal condition:
Last reviewed: · editorial process