“The Pollution Solution”, By Author Anthony M Saunders.

The Pollution Solution: Water worth the Risk
In an ideal future environment, matters affecting our ongoing (environmental) sustainability will be addressed responsibly and be underpinned utilising insurance.

In an uncertain financial climate where consumers are looking for the best “deal”, the trade off can be ambiguous clauses, exclusions and pollution limitations. These may cause uninsured losses leaving our precious water resources diseased. Is water worth the risk of being uninsured?

Pollution exclusions on Legal Liabilities covers in Australia may not apply where the escape of a pollutant is due to a sudden, unexpected and unintended occurrence.   This may give rise to arguments where an insurer could deny liability on the grounds that the conditions of the claim do not quite meet the cover conditions. Here are some examples:

• Was the cause of the matter that gave rise to the incident a gradual release or was the first moment of the release sudden and unexpected? E.G; it can take years to detect the aftermath of a sudden and unforeseen “leak”.

• Do we accept that most underground storage tanks (UST) may leak over time? Can there be “sudden and unforeseen” exposure, other than say in a major fire or other catastrophe.

• Is ignorance a defence for the responsible party of a UST or a pipeline that is leaking?    

• Do we understand that the term “polluter” can actually refer to a known and registered producer of contaminants produced in monitored and controlled amounts, which are subsequently released?

In the Pollution Solution we explore an often misunderstood area of risk exposure that can affect the lives and lively hoods of innocent third parties who simply want their (micro) environment to “get back to good”. Is water worth the risk of being uninsured?

Loss quantification is challenging, and this may be the cause of continuing arguments with insurers who may rely on complex policy limitations to avoid liability.

The fact that a property may be devalued or a business shut down as a result of some form of contamination provides a clearer method to quantify a claim and potential exposure from the outset. Carcinogens (such as dry cleaning fluids and petrol or leaking effluent) pose a different challenge. Taking away the threat of Significant Risk of Harm (SRoH) is the real key to emotional and future loss mitigation.

The Pollution Solution sets out to demystify damage quantification by providing immediate response to matters affecting our environment. Loss mitigation is first and foremost. Correct insurance then establishes protocols, which supports legislation and offers a transparent initiative that reduces reckless activity and encourages accountability. Is Water’s worth the risk of being uninsured?