P&CNationalhard
A loss is caused by both a covered peril (windstorm) and an excluded peril (flood) acting in combination. The policy contains an anti-concurrent-causation lead-in to the flood exclusion stating the exclusion applies 'regardless of any other cause or event that contributes concurrently or in any sequence to the loss.' What is the typical result?
The entire loss is excluded because the excluded peril contributed
BThe entire loss is covered because windstorm is covered
CThe insurer pays 50% as concurrent causation
DOnly the portion attributable to wind is covered, regardless of policy language
Why this is the answer
Modern ISO and proprietary forms include anti-concurrent-causation (ACC) lead-ins on key exclusions like flood, earth movement, and ordinance or law. The lead-in forecloses coverage whenever the excluded peril contributes 'concurrently or in any sequence' to the loss, even if a covered peril also contributed. Courts enforce these clauses in most jurisdictions, though some apply the older efficient-proximate-cause doctrine to override the language.
Studying for the Property & Casualty exam?
This question comes from our P&C bank. Take a free practice test — no signup.