January 06, 2009
Dog Liability and Homeowners Insurance
Insurance companies have paid particular interest to dogs in recent years and have worked at field underwriting all Homeowners and Renter’s policies for dog exposures. Their main focus is to eliminate exposure to severe losses. In 2002, dog-bite claims cost insurers almost $350 million, and accounted for a full fourth (1/4) of all liability claims. The potential exposure is significant, so underwriters, looking to earn their keep, have come up with ways to reduce their exposure.
At a typical insurance company, information on all large losses where money has not been subrogated, is gathered and periodically reviewed. Usually a committee of senior underwriters reviews what happened and then try to determine if the event was a truly unforeseen occurrence or was the loss something that they could have avoided by changing or enforcing current underwriting guidelines. From this work they have produced the policies that apply to dogs.
Since a significant percentage of the population owns dogs, insurance companies have choices to make on how to cover dogs. Some of their options:1. Exclude dogs from coverage. With this option they risk alienating dog owners who don’t have aggressive animals and take their chances that a sharp penciled plaintiff attorney won’t pick the exclusion apart in court.
2. Price policies taking all breeds types into account. Look at all dog bite cases and charge everyone enough to pay for the large losses. The insurance companies that choose this are at a disadvantage for two reasons: (1) they will be priced higher than their competition that restricts dogs and (2) people with dangerous dogs will seek coverage growing their risk exposure, not spreading it out (called adverse selection in insurance terms).
3. Write an endorsement and charge dog owners more money for dog coverage. Again, you’ll get adverse selection with dangerous breeds flocking to you. You’ll also alienate owners of less aggressive dogs who can go elsewhere for less money.
4. Identify which dogs account for the majority of bites. Then expand underwriting rules to eliminate these exposures by making them ineligible for coverage. No policy, no exposure. This option means less business and fewer premium dollars, but fewer large losses. It also does not alienate dog owners with less aggressive breeds. The only company I’ve seen that offers option one (1) is Foremost Insurance , a standard market company out of Michigan that offers policies to higher risk properties.
A few companies have not restricted dog breeds; Farmers Insurance and State Farm only restrict dogs with a bite history. As you can probably guess, most preferred-market companies have opted for option 4, so I’ll touch on their restricted dogs list.
UNACCEPTABLE DOGS:
Several states have tried to restrict an insurer’s ability to underwrite dog exposures by trying to outlaw breed discrimination. With opposition from insurance company lobbyists these bills have gone nowhere.
The lists vary by insurance company but most have listed the following breed of dogs as unacceptable:
Pit Bull Terriers, Doberman Pinschers, and Rottweilers, or any mix of these breeds.
These are just a few of the breeds that are more susceptible to aggressive behavior and it does not mean these are the only breeds insurers are concerned with. There are some carriers that have a more extensive list of unacceptable breeds. Breeds that appear on these lists include:
Akita, Alaskan Malamute, Chow, German Shepard, Presa Canario, Husky, Staffordshire Terrier and wolf hybrids to name a few.
Insurers reserve the right to decline coverage based on the overall exposure, or where they have inadequate information.
A challenge in underwriting dog exposures is that ANY dog, regardless of breed, has the capability to cause severe injury to others. Just like people, animal behavior can be a product of their environment. In addition, much depends on the lineage, how the dog was bred and how they have been treated or trained. The presence of other dogs on the premises can also have an impact on their demeanor.
The fact that insurance reports (CLUE) do not reflect a claim or that an applicant has had coverage with another carrier while owning the dog does not mean the exposure is acceptable. Keep in mind that some carriers have addressed the issue by excluding any animal liability.
There is a misconception by some that the first dog bite is “free”, meaning the exposure to loss is less. This is a fallacy. In many jurisdictions, strict liability prevails for a dog bite, particularly in those situations where it can be proven the animal is inherently unstable, the insured has had the dog trained to be aggressive or where the dog has attacked with no provocation. These factors illustrate why insurers underwrite each and every dog a homeowner or renter has. Exceptions and exclusions are not an option.
WHAT QUESTIONS SHOULD BE ASKED?
To properly determine the acceptability of a dog exposure, your insurer will ask questions to develop specific information through inquiry and inspection of your premises:
1. What breed is the dog? A mutt or mixed breed is not an acceptable answer. They need to know the specific breed to properly assess the exposure. If you can’t determine this, then they would want to review a photo of the dog before coverage is bound or even request a statement from their veterinarian on the mix.
2. How long has the Insured owned the dog? It would be appropriate to find out if you’ve owned the dog since it was a pup. If you got it as an adult, where did you obtain it? What was the reason the prior owners gave it up? Was it because of aggression?
3. What is the dog’s demeanor? Is it good with children? Has it shown aggressive tendencies? If there is any indication of inherent aggressiveness, or does not tolerate children well, insurers are not interested in taking a chance.
4. What is the dog’s history (has it attacked before)? If so, insurers will not write the exposure – period.
5. Has the dog been to obedience school? You need to differentiate obedience vs. training for other purposes, i.e. being a guard dog.
6. Where is the dog kept? Is it fenced, chained, or in the home? Is the dog left unattended for long periods, i.e. when the owners are working?
7. What type of fence or enclosure is used, if applicable? Is it in good shape? How tall is the fence? Is there a pen? For any of these, what’s the likelihood of escape?
8. What are the local ordinances involving keeping the dog? This is especially important if kept outdoors.
9. Does the insured live in a metropolitan or rural area? What is the proximity to small children?
If you are unsure on whether or not a dog exposure is acceptable once you’ve asked pertinent questions, I’d encourage you to call your agent to discuss.
BEWARE OF DOG SIGNS:
If a sign is posted on the property this should send up red flags for a potential liability hazard, even if the insured does not currently own a dog. Perhaps you “dog sit” for a friend or a relative which is still a liability exposure for the insured.
If you do not own a dog but are using it as a theft deterrent you should remove the sign. You would be advertising for a potential loss if you have someone visiting with a dog since both parties can be held liable.
Landlords and Dogs
A landlord who allows a tenant to have a dog on the premises can and has been held liable. There, it’s been said, you’ve been warned. When interviewing tenants you need to ask what breed of dog they have. If their eyes roll up and to the right, they’re looking for a creative answer because they don’t want to tell you pit-bull. Sometimes they’ll tell you a boxer mix or sporting dog – yeah mixed with pit-bull and the sport is dog fighting (been there - done that). Insist on seeing the dog. Approach the dog, is he hostile or aggressive? If yes, find different tenants. On my leases, I write an addendum for animals, that way I can revoke the animal privilege without rewriting the lease.
SUMMARY:
Insurers will never stop underwriting dogs when writing homeowner policies. Dogs are a liability hazard for insurance companies, and the risk associated with insuring their owners is too great to overlook. Addressing an unacceptable exposure after a loss occurs is too late. Take the time to identify your own exposure. By doing so, you help protect yourself and lessen the risk of lawsuits and insurance issues.
Yes, all home insurance carriers that I represent ask about dogs. I had a prospect ask about insuring her home about a year ago. I declined because she bought a rottweiler. A couple months later she had a dog bite claim with her other insurer.
Better their book of business than yours.
I remember one district underwriting rep tell me I should get ‘agressive’ with dogs to check their temperment. Yeah whatever.
I left a captive company and opened my own agency. One client wanted to come with me but I had to decline when I found out they had just bought a Pit Bull. They were a little incensed and not happy with me. A month later I heard their new dog bit their child and they had to get rid of it. There is a reason these breeds are on a list.
People are really ignorant. Pit Bulls are the most popular dog on the planet. If they were so aggressive there would be hundreds of bites a day based on shear numbers. Thats like saying people that drive Honda cars should have higher insurance since more Hondas are involved in wrecks when compared to anyone else. Its a numbers game. How are people so stupid that they don’t see that. Thank god for State Farm. I’ve been with them for 20+years with not one single incident.
Not sure where you got “most popular on the planet”? I can’t find a reference that shows pit bulls being in the top ten anywhere.
You’re correct it is a number game. And insurance actuaries have the numbers to prove pit bulls are more prone to bitting and doing damage. It’s possible minature yorkshire terriers bite more oftern than pit-bulls, but the yorkie is not going to rip your arm off.
I can’t help but feel pit-bull owners live in their own little world.
Does anyone know if livestock guarding dogs are on the list of breeds insurance companies will not insure?
I’ve never seen herding dogs on any lists of restricted animals.
Also, if you have a working ranch with more than a few animals (or acres) you’re probably not getting homeowners insurance, you should be into some type of farm coverage.
[Deleted comments .. no name calling!!] , the dogs are not to blame, but irresponsible owners that don’t keep them on leashes and such,any dog will bite if you invade his space, I got a pitbull because I got sick of people stealing stuff from my yard. I got the pitbull and nothing ever goes missing, I wonder why?. Get in my yard without permission and I believe you should get bitten, and insurance companies should not punish us for protecting our home.
A German Sheperd is a “herding dog” and they are on the list. Just fyi.
If the dog breeds on that list are all bad then maybe they should get rid of them all. Oh no wait, maybe because that they are not all bad and all breeds of dogs can bit, and it’s in their nature to do so, if not properly trained. Why do they have to pick on some but not others. I believe it should be on a case by case, if the dog is properly trained, taken care of, have good conditions at home then the company should have to insure them. I know so stupid kids that are aggressive and mean on our block and Im sure their parents have insurance. What a bunch of crap.
WOW, its amazing how misinformed some people can be. It is not cost effective to check and see which owners are good and which owners are bad. You have to make broad restrictions in order write business cheaply. You dont even have to look at the dog bite statistics; just the fact that insurance companies won’t write the business should tell you something. If it were cost effective to write pit-bulls, there would be a bigger market for it, that is how business works in a free market. Long story short, ALL companies will soon stop writing anyone with a pit-bull, regardless of how good of an owner you happen to be.
I have no problems with dog breed restrictions, in theory. However, the dog bite statistics are often based on misleading data, which I feel often means that the wrong dogs are being discriminated against.
Most of the studies are based on dog bites requiring hospitalization. Fair enough. Except that includes everyone ever bitten by a trained police or protection dog - of course German Shepherds are high up on the list.
Also, many of the northern pulling breeds (Huskies, Malamutes, Akitas) are on the list. This doesn’t take into account that, according to one report, the majority of these bites take place among dogs who are kept in large dog sled packs in the north. These are not your average household dog, but specialized dogs being kept by experienced dog sled drivers in remote locations.
I just think that it’s hard to restict by breed unless we have useful statistics on what household pets are biting our neighbors.
Some insurance companies DO actually consider the owner and can determine if they will write the policy or not. I personally own huskies, but because I am a certified dog trainer, I crate my dogs, they have good references from day care and vets, and I have no small children, I was able to be insured without issue or penalty.
I think the real issue with the breeds on this list is that there is no control on who can own them. We need to start encouraging local and state governments to consider requiring people to get some kind of specialized training and certification, or proof of responsible ownership and experience, if they want to own and breed a dog that is on this list. My neighborhood is mostly renters, and many people who are irresponsible owners have pitbulls. And these are the people breeding more and more of them and filling up the shelters.
Notice the pit bull supporters resort to name calling to try and get their point across while the rest of us with facts don’t need to go there. I love Jess’ suggestions because it will crack down on poor ownership and overpopulation which kills these dogs by the thousands weekly. But pit bull supporters are opposed to any law that singles pits out, regardless of how helpful it may be. The data is not misleading - pit bulls cause the most human deaths, the most severe attacks, and its common for them to lead the overall bite count now as well. Pit bulls usually make up the bulk of shelter residents and the reasons for calls to Animal Control. Most dog bites are not a medical emergency, which is why we don’t here the media reporting how many occur each day, and that goes for pit bulls as well. So don’t be fooled Chris, there might just be hundreds a day, even though pits are not popular and make up only 3-5% of the pet population. As long as there are people like Ivan who keep human aggressive pit bulls and don’t know the dogs are not supposed to make good guard dogs, this will be an insurance issue. Pit bulls are also genetically dog aggressive unlike most other breeds, which can also lead to claims. It is not fait for all of to pay higher insurance because someone wants an aggressive dog - let them pay for it in the same way someone would pay more for an expensive sports car.
Live stock guardians are NOTHING like herding dogs. I have heard of Kuvosz and Antatolian Shepherds on the list before. Caucasian Ovtcharkas SHOULD BE on the list but they are probably still rare.
How do you notify an insurer that your neighbor just bought a pit bull?
I’m hoping to get their homeowners company to pressure them to get rid of it.
I have grandkids here.Is there any way to get the name of someone else’s homeowners company?
Steve,
You cannot do that- you do not know the dog. I am tired of how people freak out if they see a specific dog breed walking down the street well mannered with its owner. I have two ‘dangerous breeds’ in the house and they are the best animals that I would ever have. They absolutely love people and even will not growl or snap if you take their food bowl or come up to them. It is all up to the owner to “develop and raise” the animal correctly.
I have met some pit-bulls and they may appear scary but they are so lovable.
Yes- it is important to keep the dog secure on your property and do not ever let it loose unless you’re taking it out yourself with a leash.
My neighbor’s pit bull dug under our shared fence, killed my dog and then kept me from entering the backyard until police arrived. Is this dog owner liable?
Linda,
You could consult an attorney in your state. Most of the time the law will spell out damage to animals. It usually is treated differently from bodily injury to people or property damage to personnel property. Good luck, if you want to write about your experience, let me know I’ll be happy to post it.
My landlord has had to rewrite his insurance policy and they are not insuring him because of our dog’s breed. She looks like a Staffordshire mix. We face possible eviction as a result despite the fact that we have lived here for 3 years sans incident, have a fixed female that we’ve owned since she was 10 weeks old, have never had issues with aggression or biting, have had her obedience-trained, etc. etc. etc. In short she’s a good dog, and we’re expecting our first child soon and have no worries or qualms about her interacting with the child. But sure, she’s on a dangerous breed list. She’s actually been attacked by dogs some of you would romanticize over (the noble Labrador, for example), but she’s the dangerous one. /sarcasm
The problem is the idea that you can use such a wide brush to paint a picture of a breed. I found this site looking for resources to aid me in fighting a discrimination situation. It makes me sad to see this kind of bias. I feel like people who can summarily make these kinds of generalizations don’t tend to be capable of seeing anything other than black and white anyway. It’s a shame, really.
The negative pit bull reputation is a product of the media circus and all who buy into that. My cousin’s daughter was bitten in the face by a gentle family lab she grew up with. Fourteen stitches later, the incident was not reported, the lab got off scott free from being added to any weighted “dangerous dog” list, and the myths go on. The problem is not the breed, it’s that it’s a dog first of all, and that the owner–smart or not–lacks common sense about all dogs, any dog. The most recent serious dog bite reported here locally was also a lab. The gentlest dog I ever knew was a pit bull. Positive stories about them abound, but that’s not the news an already-prejudiced person looks for. Read about how hard it is to teach a pit bull to bite. They bite less frequently than other breeds, but some bite harder. But the fact is, they have to be taught–by owners who are hateful, ignorant, and abusive AS WELL AS by owners who are lax, permissive, and negligent. I only support businesses that know what they’re talking about and who use real facts and not easily found padded ones.
To Turkey…
“The data is not misleading - pit bulls cause the most human deaths, the most severe attacks, and its common for them to lead the overall bite count now as well.” Though this statement comes directly from a pit terror site, it is indeed misleading, because it’s not true. In state statistics of say 24 breeds, pits fall into about 12th position. You must be very young that you don’t remember when pit bulls were the “nanny dog” because of their love and gentleness toward children. Pick up any reputable dog book and find the same information. Find real statistics, if you really care to talk about this, but you’d have to be prepared to become a convert. Not many people are willing to change their mind, even when new information presents itself (as we publicly witnessed in our own past president about another subject). All I’m saying is to get off the Internet and find the truth. Of the two “gentle family” labs I know who mauled the children they knew, one was not reported at all, and one was reported as a pit bull. Add that to your data!
PLEASE tell me my homeowner’s insurance WOULD NOT cover a dog claim that happened off our property. Woman is filing for mental anguish because she was jumped up on by my GSD 2 years ago. It was across the street & down one house from mine. Her lawyer sent me interrogatories requiring me to provide my insurance policy information for that time. Do I legally HAVE to give her attorney my insurance information? I have filed papers contesting her claim, and am willing to take personal responsibility for any costs. She’s suing 2 other people, our town animal control officer and selectmen. She’s a little fruit loops, but as she is suing in Superior Court, I’m taking it seriously.
Does any one know if I legally have to give them my policy information?
There’s a good chance your policy would cover liability off the property. Read your policy. If it was me, I’d inform my company about what is happening but I’d decline giving the other person’s attorney any policy information; tell them coverage information is confidential between you and your company unless a judge requires you to submit. Also take steps to insure your dog stays in your yard under control. Good luck!
Seems to me it is the pet owners that are the problem, not the animals (sarcastic). If you don’t know how to PROPERLY take care of a dog you shouldn’t have one. It isn’t just a matter of feeding and walking them. You have to know how to properly socialize your pet so they are comfortable in any environment and not a threat to anyone.
All this talk about pit bulls being the problem is ridiculous. I have 7 dogs total 2 being rescued pitties. They all get along with each other ( even with our tiniest 5lb Chihuahua,)and are definitely not people aggressive. Every generation has its breed that everyone is terrified of. 100 years ago it was the bloodhound. Only back then the media at least reported why the dog may have attacked. As years went on the media started to leave out these important details. Today a pitbull that has attacked is reported as the family dog. Now if you consider a family dog being chained outside, emaciated, and has no socialization, you are wrong! It’s pit bull popuratzi. And 1 attack gets reported all over the world. Where as when a case with a golden retriever destroyed someone’s face only a couple local news papers cover it. I’m not in denial. I work around dogs for a living and study their psychology. You people that think pitfalls are so bad, you are the ones who need to do your research.
My younger sister owns a Chiwawa which is not on the banded list, but her dog had bit a few people with broken skin(a friend came to the party, and my newphew, etc.) Luckily, nobody filed a claim against her insurance. I hate that freaking dog so much. She barks so much on everybody even on my sister. This breed should be on the banded list.Go figure!!!
It is totally ridiculous to blame the breed,and not consider how it is trained, socalized, cared for, etc.
Many, probably most,so called ‘pit bull’ bites are not from pure bred pit bull terriers. They are from mixed breeds mistaken by people who do not know breeds. Stupid people include dogs as ‘pit breeds’ that have never been involved in the cruel sport of dog fighting; an example is the American Staffordshire Terrier.
Stupid is often incurable.
Don’t blame the insurance companies, blame our judicial system. Person breaks into your house - gets his/her face chewed off by your dog - then turns around and sues you for injuries!? That’s messed up! Until that changes, the ones (insurers) paying the claims should have every right to decide what is and what is not an acceptable risk!
This whole argument is ridiculous about APBTs. I have 2, a father and daughter, they love kids and other people. I have never heard them growl or try to bite anyone. My female is best friends with a pug. Any dog, no matter what breed, will bite. If you look at the American Temperament Test Society website; it shows the breed and the pass rate on there. There is also a site that states this: “Pit Bulls attack more people than any other breed.” Bite statistics are difficult to obtain accurately. Dogs that are referred to as “pit bulls” in statistical reports actually are a variety of breeds and mixes all lumped
together under the “pit bull” heading. Also, many people have a difficult time properly identifying a true Pit Bull, so added to the statistics are those dogs that have been misidentified.” I am not here to argue with anyone; but I think it should be looked at per dog; not the whole breed. I mean if someone was convicted as a murderer, should the whole family serve life in prison?? Thank you.
Alright, one has to admit that in this land of “nanny state” this new regulation of the “insurance LIST” is completely absurd. I own a Giant Alaskan Malamute, properly trained, well behaved, never bitten a sole. My insurance company told me that he was a Wolf Hybrid and they were declining my policy. So, all you insurance people out there with all your info and lawyers YOU NEED TO GET SOME VETS working with your companies. My dog is a full bred Alaskan Malamute, not a WOLF. If my dog is a Wolf Hybrid than ALL DOGS are too…. because, they all share the gene.
If your gonna charge more, fine, but get your facts straight and stop the unfair practices. I’m over 40 and I’ve had homeowners for over 20 years with NO claims. That’s a whole lotta $$$ they have gotten from me, only to cut me off at this point. Big Banks, and now Insurance Companies…. its good to be king, right?
I have owned Four Rottweilers. I am a responsbile owner. There are many who own Rottweilers that, when it comes to this breed, have the IQ of an ashtray. I do see the Insurance companies point of View, I also see mine. I have been bitten three times…By small dogs. I think the Insurance companies should insure someone who owns what is listed as a vicious dog, as long as the person has some kind of documentation and then see if the person has ever had a judgement against them for a dog related incident. And then maybe have a rep from the company come out and take a look at who they are issuing the policy to. Rottwilers ARE great dogs, Their Loyalty is second to none!
I’m trying to determine if Cane Corso is a dog considered aggressive. I’ve asked several landlords about them but no one can supply an answer. It is a large dog belonging to the Mastiff class. Please advise if possible. Thanks.
People who know (and I mean real knowledge) anything at all about dogs know that in virtually every instance, it’s the owner’s negligence or ignorance and not any particular breed. There are breeds whose temperaments will more likely be aggressive if the owners don’t know enough to socialize them with people, animals, and situations diligently and often. Or if the owners are just too lazy to do it. But pit bulls are not one of the aggressive ones. They have to be forced to be or their energy has to be confined for them to become protective. Most pit bulls don’t “succeed” as fighting dogs, for instance, and instead become bait dogs, because they are too docile. I agree that insurers have to be careful, but the focus is totally in the wrong place. You have to be careful of insuring a dog owner who is not a good dog owner–no matter how nice or how rich they are, if they don’t SOCIALIZE, SOCIALIZE, SOCIALIZE their dog all the time, their dog probably is a poor risk. Like the only two dogs in my 60 years who bit kids in the face and maimed them were labs who were kept home all the time. I am thankful to my insurance company for insuring me and my pit bull, and they’ll insure any dog who has a clean record, but no dog who doesn’t. But judging ahead of time on breed is just plain stupid business.
I know that insurers don’t want to loose money but they should ask those questions they use to assess what the dog was like but they should also meet the dog and see if it shows aggression or not, instead of saying that “pitbulls, rotweilers and dobermans aren’t allowed” when u never met the dog. the breed means nothing, its the dog itself’s temperment u need 2 watch for. that way its a win-win situation, and less negativity towards an innocent animal.
Hey Leah, I have a new job for you: You can drive around and stick your leg in front of pitbulls, rottweilers, and dobermans to see if you get bitten.