Title: Families Sue Insurance Companies for Compensation Following Building Collapse in Holon
Subtitle: Insurance companies refuse to pay on grounds of non-coverage for building collapses caused by wear and tear
Date: [Insert Date]
Byline: [Author Name]
Holon, Israel – A group of 24 families who resided in two buildings on Serlin Street in Holon that collapsed in September 2021 are taking legal action against the seven insurance companies that insured their apartments. The families are collectively seeking 11.3 million shekels in compensation after the insurance companies refused to honor their claims, arguing that the apartment insurance policies purchased by the tenants do not cover collapses caused by wear and tear.
The collapse incident occurred after some neighbors reported being unable to open their doors. Firefighters arrived at the scene and discovered severe cracks in the building, leading to suspicions of an explosion within the building’s structure. As a precautionary measure, all 34 families residing in the two buildings were evacuated by the following day. Eventually, both buildings had to be partially demolished by the city engineer.
According to the tenants’ statement of claim, several residents reported hearing an explosion, which was confirmed in a report by Commander Reshef Yoni Buchkovsky. In the days following the incident, the commissioner of the capital market contacted the insurance companies, stating that an explosion related to the building’s infrastructure possibly caused the collapse. Therefore, the tenants argue that they are entitled to sue their insurance companies for compensation under the existing policies.
The insurance companies, on the other hand, have refused to initiate compensation procedures, claiming that there is no evidence linking the collapse to an explosion. They assert that there is no proof of an external factor, such as a missile attack, fire, or earthquake causing the collapse. Instead, they attribute it to continuous wear and tear, which their insurance policies do not cover.
Attorney Dr. Kobi Kaplansky, representing the claimant families, has expressed confidence in the families’ chances of receiving compensation, stating, “The insurance companies don’t want to pay, but the probability of receiving the compensation is very high because an explosion did occur.” He draws attention to the precedent set by the lawsuit against the insurance companies that insured the Versailles halls and the subsequent ruling that the collapse indeed resulted from an explosion in the floor infrastructure, which should have been covered by the insurance policies.
Kaplansky highlights how the judge rejected the insurance companies’ argument that they were not liable due to the collapse being caused by a non-covered factor. He emphasizes that, as in the Holon case, the insurance policies covered the explosion but, in turn, did not cover the resulting collapse. The families’ claim is supported by various professionals who believe that the explosion in the infrastructure played a significant role in the building’s collapse.
As the legal battle unfolds, the 24 families affected by the Holon building collapse remain hopeful that they will receive the compensation they deserve. Their pursuit of justice shines a spotlight on the complexities surrounding insurance coverage for such incidents and highlights the need for clarity in policy provisions to protect homeowners in unforeseen circumstances.