PDF C11 Study Guide

Loss control refers to strategies used to minimize the frequency or severity of losses. In insurance principles, loss control is divided intoloss prevention(reducing likelihood) andloss reduction(reducing severity once loss becomes imminent or unavoidable).

In this scenario, the hurricane threat is already occurring and cannot be prevented. Jack’s actions—placing sandbags, boarding windows, and securing the premises—are aimed atreducing the amount of damagefrom an impending peril. This aligns exactly withloss reduction, which focuses on mitigating the extent of loss after a peril has already materialized or cannot reasonably be avoided.

Avoidance (option A) would involve eliminating the risk entirely, such as relocating the business out of hurricane-prone regions. Risk transfer (option B) involves shifting financial consequences to an insurer. Diversification (option C) spreads exposure across multiple assets or locations. Jack is instead applying a protective measure to reduce damage, makingD. Loss reductionthe correct choice.

When more than one insurer covers the same property under policies with identical terms, the loss is often shared according to the proportion of insurance each company provides. This is commonly referred to as contribution “pro rata by limits.”

First, determine the total amount of insurance:

Insurer X: $400,000

Insurer Y: $100,000

Total insurance: $500,000

Next, determine each insurer’s percentage of the total:

Insurer X: 400,000 ÷ 500,000 = 80%

Insurer Y: 100,000 ÷ 500,000 = 20%

The total loss is $100,000, so each insurer pays its proportion of the loss:

Insurer X: 80% × $100,000 = $80,000

Insurer Y: 20% × $100,000 = $20,000

There is no deductible to adjust these amounts. Thus, Insurer X pays $80,000 and Insurer Y pays $20,000, making Option C correct.

With a guaranteed replacement cost policy, the insurer agrees to pay the full cost of replacing the damaged or destroyed property (subject to conditions), even if that amount approaches or, in some forms, exceeds the stated limit. Here, the total replacement cost of the loss is $500,000.

However, some furniture is salvageable and valued at $4,000. Since Dominika elects to keep this salvage, she is effectively retaining part of the value of the damaged property. To maintain the principle of indemnity and avoid overpayment, the insurer deducts the salvage value from the total amount they would otherwise pay.

Step-by-step:

Replacement cost of loss: $500,000

Less salvage value retained by insured: $4,000

Subtotal: $496,000

Less deductible: $1,000

Net settlement: $495,000

Therefore, Dominika will recover $495,000, making Option A correct.

In determining liability, the immediate (proximate) cause refers to the most direct, unbroken cause leading to the injury. In this sequence, the firecracker explodes in Celina’s hands immediately after she receives it from Sandra. Although Antonio initiated the chain of events and Brett contributed, their actions are more remote.

The last voluntary act that directly placed the dangerous object in the position where it caused harm was Sandra’s throw to Celina. Sandra’s action is therefore the immediate cause, even though earlier individuals may share legal responsibility in a broader causation analysis.

Option D is incorrect because Celina did not cause her own injury; she merely received the firecracker.

Option C includes Antonio and Brett, but neither was the final actor in the chain.

Therefore, the immediate cause of loss is B: Sandra.