It sounds very much like what gets in a small claims hearing, you know, for TV viewers, Judge Wapner, Judge Judy, where the plaintiff and defendants prepare their own cases, photos, witnesses and other documentation.
The expectation is that a judge could adjudicate in such a manner that all costs of the claim are disbursed in a fair way, given the facts are presented clearly and honestly.
Yes, the artificial grass is not covered, but that which is underneath the grass is still damaged. Would the proposition that a level piece of ground is surely constituent to what makes up a tennis court be a tenable legal argument?
if so, the insurer should pay for the tree removal, and repair of the damaged terrain (minus the artificial turf), thus permitting the replacement turf to be laid with minimum fuss.
Itâs the point of contention by the OP that it is as it forms part of the construction of the tennis court.
Interesting to ask.
A court needs earthworks to level, unsuitable material to be removed, stable fill to be placed graded compacted and precision trimmed. Drainage needs to be incorporated to suit the site. The underlying works and final topping of the court deliver the playing surface to make it a court.
If the under-surface was compacted sand or gravel or soil it would be not covered if the interpretation of the exclusions is correct. Thus no coverage for the court section of the tennis court unless made of concrete or some other product not contained in the exclusionsâŠthus probably not a conventional tennis court. I think this is why the exclusions may not apply in the tennis court section, I may be wrong. Only way to test this is to seek clarity by contesting the current outcome.
While not disagreeing with your point, just as a matter of interest; what are tennis courts made of apart from âloose or compacted soil, sand, lawn, artificial grass, gravel âŠpebbles, rocks or granular rubberâ?
I guess concrete or asphalt is the only answer I can think of. I imagine these would be in the minority of residential tennis court surfaces. I think if you are going to brag about covering tennis courts, as mentioned previously, you need to cover the majority, not exclude them.
Many of those surfaces are high maintenance, especially grass. I could imagine if they were covered there would still be exclusions, probably much higher premiums and possible many intractable disputes about whether damage was caused by normal wear and tear, neglect, or insurable events like storm damage.
I donât have a dog in this fight but it might be prudent to be careful what you wish for.
There are a range of other materials which possibly would be covered by the policy, namely:
- Acrylic / Polyurethane (Hard) Courts
- Asphalt
- Carpet (esp using nylon materials)
- Concrete
If one has a tennis court and is unsure what surfaces may be covered in consideration of general policy exclusions, it is recommended to contact their insurer for clarification. Any clarification should be requested in writing. It is too late after making a claim to seek clarification.
That looks like a wise option for those who believe they are covered. Suncorp also cover swimming pools and spas. Inground and above ground including inflatable.
The advice from Suncorp includes that the insured sum needs to be adequate to cover the home plus pool etc. If one has a tennis court, the cost to rebuild a court from the ground up could be substantial if it includes reestablishing the court playing surface. Irrespective of type.
