Legal Guidance and Research / Experts / Alexander Rosenfield

Alexander Rosenfield

Alex is a Senior Associate at Fenchurch Law. He specialises in insurance coverage disputes for policyholders with a focus towards property damage claims. 
 
Prior to joining Fenchurch Law in 2017, Alex worked at Elborne Mitchell in the heart of the London insurance market. He trained with BPS Law LLP in Manchester, specialising in policyholder coverage work.
 
Alex is passionate about delivering Fenchurch Law’s mission statement of levelling the playing field for policyholders and has been quoted in several of the country’s leading insurance publications and newspapers on policyholder coverage issues. Those include an article for the Guardian which highlighted the challenges of complying with ‘Unoccupied Buildings’ conditions at the height of the COVID-19 Pandemic.
 
Alex graduated from the University of Birmingham in 2009, before completing the LPC at the College of Law in 2010.
 
Away from his practice, Alex is a member of the Society of Construction Law and the British Insurance Law Association. He also sits on BILA’s Young Professionals’ Committee as Media Officer.

Practice Area

Panel

  • Contributing Author

Qualified Year

  • 2012

Experience

  • Fenchurch Law (2017 - Present)
  • Elborne Mitchell LLP (2015 - 2017)
  • BPS Law LLP (2010 - 2015)

Membership

  • BILA (British Insurance Law Association)
  • BILA Young professionals
  • Society of Construction Law

Qualifications

  • Legal Practice Course (Commendation) (2010)
  • LLB (Hons) (2009)

Education

  • The College of Law (2009-2010)
  • University of Birmingham (2006-2009)

5 Contributions by Alexander Rosenfield

Commercial insurance fraud and dishonesty: definition, proof, fair presentation, inducement, fraudulent claims and insurer remedies under the Insurance Act 2015, and attribution across agents, assignees and co-insureds
PRACTICE NOTES
Commercial insurance fraud and dishonesty: definition, proof, fair presentation, inducement, fraudulent claims and insurer remedies under the Insurance Act 2015, and attribution across agents, assignees and co-insureds
This Practice Note reviews the authorities on the meaning of ‘fraud’ and sets out the core principles applicable to business insureds, both when arranging insurance at inception and throughout the claims process. What amounts to fraud, and how is it established? Fraud There is no rigid definition of fraud in the insurance sphere. A leading statement of the test for deceit appears in Lord Herschell’s speech in Derry v Peek: first, an action for deceit requires proof of fraud; nothing less will do. Secondly, fraud is made out where a false representation is shown to have been made (i) knowingly, (ii) without any belief in its truth, or (iii) recklessly, being indifferent as to whether it is true or false. Although the second and third limbs are often described separately, the third is really an example of the second, because a person who makes a statement in such circumstances cannot genuinely believe it to be true. To avoid a false statement being characterised as fraudulent, there must always be an honest belief in its accuracy. More recent authorities have further clarified the meaning of ‘fraud’ and the principles that apply to business insureds at policy inception and during the claims process...
Insurance & Reinsurance
Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act 2012: scope, abolition of disclosure, reasonable care, proportionate remedies, basis clause ban, non-contracting out and burden of proof
PRACTICE NOTES
Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act 2012: scope, abolition of disclosure, reasonable care, proportionate remedies, basis clause ban, non-contracting out and burden of proof
Insurance contracts have long seemed enigmatic to law students and practising lawyers. The reason is that they are contracts of the utmost good faith. They are unlike ordinary agreements: they must be treated with exceptional care. The central element of the obligation of utmost good faith, as articulated in the Marine Insurance Act 1906 (MIA 1906), is the policyholder’s duty to volunteer information to the insurer that would ‘influence the judgment of a prudent insurer’ when deciding whether to accept the risk and what to charge for it (see: MIA 1906, s 18). This has always been a demanding requirement. In truth, it has long been a tall order. It expects the policyholder to second‑guess the insurer’s thinking and make disclosure on that basis. The insurer, by contrast, was free to sit back and remain passive, under no obligation to offer the policyholder any hints or prompts. It was straightforward for the policyholder to breach this duty, with severe consequences: any material non‑disclosure (honest, innocent, careless or otherwise) entitled the insurer to avoid the cover (MIA 1906, s 18(1)). For the policyholder, that could be a devastating outcome. A potentially catastrophic result for the policyholder...
Insurance & Reinsurance
General (Non‑Life) Insurance for Consumers and Businesses: Policy Classes, Statutory and Regulatory Frameworks, Exclusions and Claims/Notification Essentials for Lawyers
PRACTICE NOTES
General (Non‑Life) Insurance for Consumers and Businesses: Policy Classes, Statutory and Regulatory Frameworks, Exclusions and Claims/Notification Essentials for Lawyers
Consumer insurance and commercial insurance for businesses This Practice Note sets out an overview of several widely used insurance types, who may require them, and how they operate. Broadly, insurance falls into two groupings: cover for consumers cover for businesses For individuals purchasing as consumers, the governing statute is the Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act 2012 (CI(DR)A 2012). CI(DR)A 2012 describes a consumer as an ‘individual who enters into the contract wholly or mainly for purposes unrelated to that individual’s business trade or profession’. The Act addresses what a consumer is obliged to tell the insurer before making, or changing, an insurance contract. See Practice Note: A guide to the Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act 2012 for additional detail. For business policyholders, the applicable legislation is the Insurance Act 2015 (IA 2015). IA 2015 signifies a paradigm shift away from what had been seen as an outdated and overly insurer-friendly regime, aiming to achieve a ‘better balance of interests between policyholders and insurers’. Under IA 2015, s 1, any insurance contract that is not a consumer contract is treated as a non-consumer contract...
Insurance & Reinsurance
Reinstatement Clauses in Property Insurance: Election to Reinstate, Measure of Indemnity, Requirement to Carry Out Works, Intentions and Betterment—Key Principles and Case Law
PRACTICE NOTES
Reinstatement Clauses in Property Insurance: Election to Reinstate, Measure of Indemnity, Requirement to Carry Out Works, Intentions and Betterment—Key Principles and Case Law
This Practice Note outlines the key principles on reinstatement in property insurance. What is reinstatement? Reinstatement means repairing or replacing property so that it is restored to its pre-loss condition, or to a state that is materially equivalent. The drafting of reinstatement clauses differs from policy to policy and can lead to markedly different outcomes for the policyholder. Depending on the exact wording, the policyholder may or may not receive a cash settlement, may or may not be obliged to rebuild, and may or may not have to rebuild on the same site. Many policies also give the insurer the option to reinstate. Who does it? Typically, the policyholder undertakes the reinstatement. However, numerous policies allow the insurer, at its election, to carry out the reinstatement. Why might an insurer choose to do so? Insurers may have several reasons for electing to reinstate themselves rather than allowing the policyholder to do so or paying a sum equivalent to the reinstatement cost. One reason recognised by the courts is to avoid what might be ‘the temptation to an ill‑minded owner to set fire’...
Insurance & Reinsurance
Underinsurance in UK Property and Business Interruption Insurance: Causes, Remedies (Average, IA 2015, CIDRA 2012) and Broker Duties—Infinity Reliance v Heath Crawford
PRACTICE NOTES
Underinsurance in UK Property and Business Interruption Insurance: Causes, Remedies (Average, IA 2015, CIDRA 2012) and Broker Duties—Infinity Reliance v Heath Crawford
This Practice Note offers an in-depth examination of underinsurance, its principal causes, the remedies available to insurers when policyholders underinsure, and recent case law concerning brokers’ duties. Introduction Underinsurance remains one of the most entrenched problems in UK property and business interruption (BI) insurance. A majority of policyholders arrange cover for less than the full value of their assets and, as a result, risk significant shortfalls if they need to claim. Despite how common it is, reported decisions on underinsurance are scarce. Much of the applicable law stems from the Insurance Act 2015 (IA 2015), the Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act 2012 (CI(DR)A 2012), and older authorities on materiality and disclosure. For more on IA 2015, see Practice Note: Insurance Act 2015 (IA 2015)—essentials, and for CI(DR)A 2012, see Practice Note: A guide to the Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act 2012. What is Underinsurance? Definition Underinsurance arises where the sum insured or declared value is inadequate to cover the actual loss after damage. This can occur in relation to: Material damage—where the insured value is below the true rebuild or replacement cost BI—where declared gross profit,...
Insurance & Reinsurance
Expert page AD
If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.