I feel for them, but far and away no business interruption insurance covers pandemics. As a business owner, this was the first question I asked my insurance agent back in March.
suzycat said: "I feel for them, but far and away no business interruption insurance covers pandemics. As a business owner, this was the first question I asked my insurance agent back in March. "
Don’t some policies cover pandemics? Jujamcyn did get $250k
There is nothing unique about this lawsuit to the theatre business. Many many thousands of businesses have sued because insurance companies are (of necessity) playing hardball. Also, every contract is different and without knowing what the contract says it is not really possible to discuss broadly. Presumably they have SOME revenue coming in, but they have still had a huge loss of revenue obviously. From the sound of it, I would say they are on very shaky ground, but in situations like this you sue. Most restaurants have sued, and virtually none have collected. This is just one of a million major crises that will have to be dealt with in due course.
suzycat said: "I feel for them, but far and away no business interruption insurance covers pandemics. As a business owner, this was the first question I asked my insurance agent back in March."
That may well be true for your particular policy -- but it is wholly inaccurate to claim that NO insurance policy covers pandemics. These cases will be filling the courts for the next decade or so.
JSquared2 said: "suzycat said: "I feel for them, but far and away no business interruption insurance covers pandemics. As a business owner, this was the first question I asked my insurance agent back in March."
That may well be true for your particular policy -- but it is wholly inaccurate to claim that NO insurance policy covers pandemics. These cases will be filling the courts for the next decade or so."
Not sure about the next decade, but I imagine that the Shuberts and Nederlanders were also denied
zainmax said: "Not sure about the next decade, but I imagine that the Shuberts and Nederlanders were also denied"
Understand, please, that what you are hearing about is the initial volley in one of thousands or maybe millions of suits against insurance companies. It is normal that at this stage everyone throws everything against the wall to see what sticks. I would not read too much into anything you've read. This will definitely still be going on a decade from now because it is too big a chunk of change to fade away. (Compare, for example, to the time it took to bring an end to the WTC insurance litigation. It ended a couple of years ago, and that was only one (or two, depending on if you believe Larry Silverstein or his insurers) building(s). Regarding the Shuberts, I don't know but it would not surprise me if they are self-insured with a blanket reinsurance contract that probably has not yet been triggered (and may not be). This is all a great deal more complex than the clickbait would tell you.