The insured and the insurer agree the fire loss is covered but cannot agree on what it is worth. Under the appraisal condition:
Explanation
Appraisal is a valuation mechanism, not a coverage mechanism: each side names a competent independent appraiser, the two of them select an umpire, and agreement between any two of the three sets the amount of loss. It is available only where coverage itself is not in dispute. Nothing in it lets the adjuster fix the figure alone or forces the insured into court, and the claim is not denied merely for want of agreement.
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 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:
- 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 suit against us condition in a property policy provides that the insured may sue the insurer only if:
- After a covered glass loss, the insurer notifies the insured that it will replace the glass rather than pay cash. This is permitted because:
- A warehouse is covered by two policies on the same property, one for $100,000 and one for $300,000, each with a pro rata other-insurance clause. A $40,000 covered loss occurs. The $100,000 policy pays:
Last reviewed: · editorial process