Does my restaurant insurance require hood cleaning?

Frequently yes, through a specific endorsement most operators have never read. Unlike almost everything else in this area, you can settle this question yourself today by looking at your own policy for a named form.

What to look for

Commercial property policies in the United States are commonly built on standard ISO forms. One of them is the Protective Safeguards endorsement, carried on form number CP 04 11 for commercial property. A similar provision exists on IL 04 15.

The endorsement carries a schedule listing protective systems by symbol. The ones that matter to a commercial kitchen:

• P-1, automatic sprinkler system.
• P-2, automatic fire alarm.
• P-5, automatic commercial cooking exhaust and extinguishing system. This is your hood and its suppression.

Search your policy document for "Protective Safeguards", for "CP 04 11", or for "P-5". Your broker can also tell you in one phone call whether the endorsement is on your policy and which symbols are scheduled.

What P-5 actually covers, which is more than the hood

The endorsement defines P-5 as an automatic commercial cooking exhaust and extinguishing system installed on cooking appliances, and it names four components:

• the hood
• the grease removal device, meaning your filters
• the duct system
• the wet chemical fire extinguishing equipment, meaning your suppression system

That is worth reading twice, because it is broader than most operators assume. P-5 is not just "the hood". It is the hood, the filters, the ductwork and the suppression system treated as one protective safeguard. All four are inside the same condition, and they are usually serviced by two different companies on two different schedules.

Three obligations, and the third one surprises people

Where the endorsement applies, the insured is required to do three things:

1. Maintain the scheduled safeguards in complete working order, limited to those over which you have control. That qualifier matters in a leased kitchen. See who is responsible under the lease.
2. Keep any automatic alarm or automatic system actively engaged and in the on position at all times.
3. Notify the insurer of any known suspension of, or impairment in, a listed safeguard.

The third is the one almost nobody knows about. If your suppression system is tagged out of service, if a cylinder is discharged and not yet recharged, or if the system fails an inspection and is left impaired, that is a known impairment and the endorsement asks you to tell your carrier. Most operators call the service company and never think to call the broker.

How the exclusion is worded

The endorsement adds an exclusion to the causes of loss forms. Its effect is that the insurer will not pay for loss or damage caused by or resulting from fire if, prior to the fire, the insured failed to comply with any of the conditions above.

Three things follow from that wording.

• It is specific to fire. It does not reach into every peril in the policy.
• It turns on the state of things before the fire, which is why historical records rather than current condition are what answer it.
• It says any condition, which includes the notification duty. Failing to report a known impairment is a failure to comply, independent of whether the cleaning was up to date.

The 48 hour allowance, and what it does not cover

Where part of a sprinkler or cooking exhaust and extinguishing system is shut off because of breakage, leakage, freezing conditions or opened sprinkler heads, notifying the insurer is not necessary if full protection is restored within 48 hours.

Read the list of causes. It is about sudden physical events. Deferring a service visit, running past a cleaning interval, or leaving a failed inspection uncorrected are not on it, and the allowance does not reach them.

The distinction that matters, stated carefully

The endorsement requires the system to be maintained. It does not, by its own terms, require you to keep paperwork. Those are two different obligations and it is worth being precise about the difference, because a number of articles on this subject are not.

The reason records matter anyway is evidential. If a fire loss is disputed, the question becomes whether the system was in working order and maintained, and service records are ordinarily the only way anybody can answer that after the equipment has burned. Having no records does not automatically decide the question against you. It does remove your ability to answer it.

Put plainly, the endorsement determines what is covered, and your records determine what you can demonstrate.

Four questions worth asking your broker

1. Is a Protective Safeguards endorsement on this policy, and which symbols are scheduled?
2. What service interval does the carrier expect for the scheduled systems, and is it stated anywhere in writing?
3. If a claim were made, what documentation would the carrier expect to see, and how far back?
4. How do you want to be told if a system is impaired, and what counts as an impairment worth reporting? This is the notification duty above, and agreeing the process in advance is far easier than working it out on the day a suppression system is tagged out.

The second question is the useful one, because a carrier's expected interval can be shorter than what your fire code requires. Where they differ, the shorter one is the one that governs your coverage, and the fire code will not help you in a claim.

This page describes standard industry forms in general terms. It is not a reading of your policy, and it is not insurance advice. Only your own policy document and your broker can tell you what applies to you.