WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SF 4406

Certain exclusions in homeowner's insurance policies prohibited when damage is done by a peace officer

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by John Hoffman and 1 co-sponsor

Minnesota bill prohibiting homeowner insurance exclusions for peace officer property damage, shifting liability costs from homeowners to insurers.

Rule 45-amend, subst. General Orders HF4133, SF indefinitely postponed
#insurance #insurance-propertyandliability
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SF 4406

Legislative bill overview

SF 4406 would prohibit homeowners insurance policies from excluding coverage for property damage caused by peace officers acting in their official capacity. Currently, many insurance policies contain broad exclusions for damage caused by law enforcement during lawful activities like executing warrants, making arrests, or responding to emergencies. This bill would eliminate that exclusion and require insurers to cover such damages.

Why is this important

Homeowners can face significant financial losses when police conduct operations that damage their property—broken doors, windows, structural damage during searches, or collateral damage during responses. Without insurance coverage, victims must pursue costly legal claims against municipalities or officers individually, creating barriers to recovery. This bill shifts the financial responsibility from property owners to insurers, potentially establishing a more accessible compensation pathway.

Potential points of contention

  • Insurance cost impacts: Insurers may argue this expands their liability exposure significantly, potentially increasing premiums for all policyholders to cover peace officer-related claims
  • Moral hazard concerns: Questions about whether removing exclusions affects law enforcement decision-making, or creates incentives for claiming peace officer involvement rather than other covered causes
  • Definition ambiguity: The bill's scope depends heavily on how "peace officer" and "acting in official capacity" are defined—unclear language could create disputes over what qualifies for coverage
  • Municipal liability relationships: This may create conflicts between homeowner insurance, municipal liability coverage, and state tort immunity laws that currently protect government entities

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.