Myles v. Northern Assurance Co.

Citations

• 113 Wash. 158
• 193 P. 703
• 1920 Wash. LEXIS 833

Syllabus

<p>Insurance (77) — Fire Insurance — Avoidance of Policy for Fraud — Representations as to Value. In an action upon a fire insurance policy, the defense that the policy was induced by false representations as to the value of the property, is not sustained by-evidence that the insured stated to the agent that the house was “worth about $2,000,” where it appears that the agent visited the premises and made his own inspection; in view of Rem. Code, § 6059-105, making it a presumption of fact that the agent knew the value of the house.</p> <p>Same (77). Rem. Code, § 6059-105%, providing that, where property is wholly destroyed without criminal fault on the part of the insured, the amount of the insurance written shall be taken conclusively as the true value of the property, does not preclude the defense of fraud and misrepresentation by the insured as to the value, inducing the issuance of a policy in an excessive amount.</p> <p>Same (91) — Breach of Condition — Change of Ownership. Under Rem. Code, § 6059-34, providing that breach of warranty or condition shall not avoid the policy unless the breach exists at the time of the loss, the insured’s temporary transfer of his title to a third person will not avoid the policy under the clause forbidding change of interest or title, where at the time of the loss, the property had been conveyed back to the insured, who was then vested with title.</p> <p>Same (95, 188) — Forfeiture of Policy — Breach of Condition— Additional Insurance — Question fob Jury. In an action upon a fire insurance policy, whether additional insurance on the property was concealed from the agent, or whether the agent was led to believe that additional insurance had been cancelled, are questions for the jury, where the agent testified to that effect and the insured denied such fact and testified that the agent stated that additional insurance would not affect the policy.</p>