Submit your claim details for a free, no obligation case review.
Get Started:
A growing number of homeowner policies are denying or failing to renew policies because of a type of dog the family owns. Some insurers have prohibited homeowners from having dangerous dogs for years, but this trend has become more common in the last five years.
In response to a growing number of dog bite claims, some companies have developed lists of breeds that they restrict from coverage because of the potential dog bite attacks. In a federal study looking at cases from 1979 through 1996, more than half of all dog attack fatalities in identifiable breeds were pit bulls and rottweilers, with more than 25 different breeds responsible for killing people.
Both consumers and animal advocates have labeled the insurance practice “breed profiling,” unfairly judging a family pet based on its potential behavior instead of on its actual behavior. Some families have been denied renewal policies without having the opportunity to prove they are responsible owners just because of the insurer’s breed restriction.
Some families are finding the most responsible pet owners are instead being punished. Responsible dog owners register their animals with government authorities and the American Kennel Club if the dog is purebred, but these are the owners that are most likely to be noticed by an insurance company that restricts certain dog breeds.
Every dog has the potential to bite and to be dangerous, and while many people support dangerous dog bite laws, they believe targeting breeds is unfair. Michigan and Pennsylvania restricts breed profiling, and a bill in the Washington state House of Representatives seeks to prevent insurers from banning breeds as well.
If it becomes a law, Washington would become just the third state to enforce the restriction. The bill would prohibit companies from denying an application, canceling or not renewing a policy or modifying an existing policy based on whether the homeowner owns or harbors a specific breed. Companies would be allowed to continue denying policies for households that have “dangerous” dogs, as defined in Washington by prior conduct.
The Washington Insurance Council represents insurers that write about 80 percent of the state’s homeowner policies. Of those 80 percent, a little over half of the member companies keep dog breed bans. About 23 percent of companies do not enforce a dog breed ban and 23 percent have a list of dog breeds they scrutinize, if not restricting them completely.
Copyright © 2001 - 2012 Online Lawyer Source
ATTORNEY ADVERTISEMENT—Thank you for your visit. The content published on this website was not written by medical professionals and should not, at any point, be mistaken for medical advice. Furthermore, the information on this site is intended for educational purposes only and should never interfere with a patient/site visitor and his or her healthcare provider. In addition, viewing the content on this website, requesting additional information, or transmitting information through a contact form should never be considered the formation of an attorney-client relationship. The material published on this site is general and may not apply to your specific circumstances. Every case comes with its own set of unique circumstances; past success discussed on this site does not guarantee future performance. Information found on this website should not be used as incentive to act without seeking counsel from a professional. For more information, please read our disclaimer.