Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause
A policy clause excluding coverage entirely when a covered peril, like wind, and an excluded peril, like flood, combine to cause damage, even if the covered peril alone would have caused some damage on its own before the excluded peril ever arrived.
Why it matters
This clause became a nationally significant issue after Hurricane Katrina, when insurers denied wind-damage claims for homes also hit by storm surge, arguing the clause barred any recovery at all, even for damage that was demonstrably wind-only and occurred before the flooding reached the property.
On a real project
A coastal home loses part of its roof to wind hours before storm surge floods the first floor. An insurer denies the entire claim by pointing to the anti-concurrent causation clause, even though the roof damage alone, caused only by wind, would ordinarily be covered on its own.
Who this matters most to
A Construction Claims Consultant investigates the actual physical sequence of a coastal loss, wind first or water first, since that sequence is exactly what an anti-concurrent causation dispute turns on.
Where this goes wrong
An adjuster denies an entire coastal claim by citing the anti-concurrent causation clause the moment floodwater is found anywhere on the property, without separately assessing whether wind alone caused damage before the flooding arrived. Courts have required insurers to still pay for damage proven to be wind-only, so an incomplete causation investigation can cost the insurer a claim it should have partially paid.