Lover spreads money on bed, intruder robs him, sets house on fire, shoots him in the buttocks and flees. Court rules his homeowners insurance did not cover loss

A Kentucky man attempted to reenact a scene from the movie Indecent Proposal. After laying $7000 on bed prior to planned romantic encounter, an intruder broke in, stole the money, set the house on fire, and shot him in the buttocks. He then found out his insurance policy had been cancelled.

Kentucky.COURT OF APPEALS CASE #4 ISSUED JUNE 23, 2006, summarized by LawReader.com in its weekly decisions:

INSURANCE COMPANY WAS NOT OBLIGATED TO PROVIDE COVERAGE AFTER HOMEOWNER FAILED TO PAY FOR THE POLICY.  IT WAS HOMEOWNER’S RESPONSIBILITY TO INFORM INSURER OF HIS NEW ADDRESS, THEREFORE FAILURE TO RECEIVE NOTICE OF POLICY CANCELLATION WAS NOT INSURER’S FAULT.

HUDDLESTON, SENIOR JUDGE: Richard Humphrey, the owner of a house situated on the banks of Kentucky Lake in Western
Kentucky, appeals from a summary judgment that denied his claim for insurance benefits and related damages arising from the partial destruction of his house by fire. This litigation arose after a fire at Humphrey’s lake house in Marshall County on May

Humphrey sought funds to pay off personal debts and also planned to finance a romantic weekend during which he planned to propose marriage to Kelley.

 Humphrey intended to recreate a scene from
the movie “Indecent Proposal,? where money would be spread across a bed for an intimate encounter.

That evening, Humphrey set the romantic mood by spreading the money on the sofa in the living room of the lake house. Unfortunately for Humphrey, a masked intruder forced his way into the home and
brandished a gun. A physical altercation ensued and the intruder was revealed to be Chadwick.

During the scuffle, Humphrey was shot in the buttocks and knocked unconscious.
While the two men were fighting, Kelley gathered the money in a garbage bag and ran outside. Candles were inadvertently knocked over and the couch was engulfed in flames.

Chadwick dragged Humphrey outside the burning house and fled with the cash.
Chadwick and Kelley were subsequently prosecuted for their roles in the arson, assault and robbery.

On May 28, 1998, Humphrey filed a claim for the damage with Western Rivers Corporation, his local insurance agency.  Western Rivers informed Humphrey that his homeowner’s policy had
been cancelled by his insurance carrier, Grange Mutual Casualty Company, for non-payment of premium on May 14, 1998. Humphrey claimed he never received notice that his policy was to be
cancelled.

It is indisputable that Grange gave proper statutory
notice that the policy would be cancelled for non-payment. It is also undisputed that Mary, who was a named insured on the policy, continued living at the Missouri address where Grange sent the cancellation notices. Furthermore, it was Humphrey’s
responsibility to ensure that Grange had the proper contact information if he expected to receive mail at his lake house.

Once Grange properly cancelled the policy for non-payment, Grange no longer owed any duty to Humphrey. The parties’ relationship was based on contractual obligation, and Grange was
not obligated to provide coverage after Humphrey failed to pay for the policy.  Accordingly, summary judgment was properly granted in favor of Grange as a matter of law.

Finally, Humphrey argues Western Rivers is liable
under the UCSPA. We disagree. Western Rivers was not obligated to disclose the status of Humphrey’s policy, and it otherwise made no material misrepresentations.

Consequently, Humphrey’s claims must fail, and we find summary judgment for Western Rivers was proper as a matter of law.

Comments are closed.