18 Del. Admin. Code § 701-4.0
COMMENTARY
The principal objective of policy revision is to make it readable and understandable to the average layman. This does not mean that language used should be so informal that the importance of the contract is lessened. While unnecessary legalistic terminology can be and should be avoided, precision and accuracy must not be sacrificed in the process. Moreover, the revised policy should be sufficiently formal that it cannot be mistaken for a brochure or other advertising piece.
COMMENTARY
Simplification is a desirable by-product of such a project. However, simplification and "Streamlining" should be advertent and deliberate. Great care must be exercised to make certain that coverages set forth in the readable policy accurately express the intent of the drafters. The revised policy should conform to the existing policy or to newly introduced coverage concepts.
COMMENTARY
Initiation of a readability project affords the insurer a unique opportunity to rearrange the contract into logical thought outline flow sequence.
COMMENTARY
An effort should be made to rewrite with the objective of making each coverage independent of other policy provisions to the greatest degree possible. Some contract formats do not lend themselves to ease of comprehension. Even a knowledgeable reader must often refer to several different policy parts in order to solve specific coverage questions. Revisions should avoid this where possible.
COMMENTARY
While policy conditions applicable only to certain coverages should be located in the appropriate coverage section, this does not mean that each section must be redundant as to certain provisions common to all, or virtually all, coverages. This means on the one hand that there must be some repetition and, on the other, that there must be some compromise with the goal of independence of coverage provisions.
COMMENTARY
Careful review may well result in identification of unnecessary language. Some reduction of surplusage may be necessary in order to conserve space which may be needed in other areas for additional material introduced to improve readability.
COMMENTARY
Generally, readability is enhanced by judiciously combining reasonably large type with other printing devices. However, other factors must be considered in order to avoid an overly lengthy policy. Increased paper and postage expense may result from adoption of large size type. Therefore, 8 point type size is an acceptable minimum.
COMMENTARY
Extreme type styles, such as "Old English" or heavy block should be avoided. There are many acceptable type styles and reliable printers are generally capable of properly advising as to which individual style or combination of styles is most desirable for ease of reading.
COMMENTARY
Insurers should consider adoption of bold-face captions or use of a different type size or type style for headings and captions. Upper case type or printing in contrasting color may also be used for emphasis.
COMMENTARY
Ample usage of white spacing can enhance readability. Insurers should use white or buffer space between the various headings, captions, and columns to avoid squeezing too much language on any one page. This makes the policy less of a challenge to the reader.
COMMENTARY
Policies are more readable if printed on highly contrasting ink and paper. Use of more than one color might be advisable. Insurers may wish to use appropriate illustrations.
COMMENTARY
Policy size and weight of paper is a problem, and will inevitably involve certain compromises. In general, insurers must evaluate their capacity to produce policies of a particular size, based on existing forms, procedures and equipment. The policyholder's convenience in storing the policy should be kept in mind. Cost of mailing and printing is an essential and proper consideration.
COMMENTARY
A policy table of contents is a necessary readability aid and permits ease of location of important contract provisions.
COMMENTARY
Defined words and terms shall be used for purposes of clarity and to avoid frequent repetition and avoidable redundancy. Defined words may then be capitalized or underlined in the text. Definitions should be kept to a minimum. Many words and terms, particularly those common to one coverage or section, can be explained in the text material itself without appearing to be formal definitions.
COMMENTARY
Legalistic terminology and legal sounding phrases should be avoided wherever possible. The adoption of conversational style does not mean that writing should be less accurate than at present. Undoubtedly, there will be portions of the contract requiring precision of thought and specific legal terminology. However, this should be kept to a minimum. Contractions can be used where appropriate. Correct grammar should be used throughout the text. Debasement of the English language is not necessary in order to make a formal document more comprehensible to its readers.
COMMENTARY
Vocabulary is a tool, a means to an end. It is not a proper end in itself. Avoid long, polysyllabic words when short ones will do just as well.
COMMENTARY
Most experts in modem writing agree that good sentences would average less than 20 words. It is preferable to express a complete thought in each short sentence and then to convey complex ideas by use of several short sentences. Periods are better than colons or semicolons unless an outline style is adopted.
COMMENTARY
Use of "his," "her," "you," etc. is proper in a formal document. Current use of the impersonal style in insurance contracts does not lend itself to ease of comprehension. Present tense and active verbs should be used wherever possible.
COMMENTARY
Modem readability tests measure comprehension on the basis of sentence and word length and emphasize that short sentences and monosyllabic words are preferable when complex concepts are to be conveyed to the reader. All such homeowners insurance policy forms shall have a total "readability score" of 40 or more on the Flesch Scale, although forms with a Flesch Test Score of less than 40 may be approved where the length of sentences and words are sufficiently compensated for by compliance with standards set forth above.
18 Del. Admin. Code § 701-4.0