cst贴片天线仿真:翻译！急！

An “insured” may waive in writing before a loss all rights of recovery against any person. If not waived, we may require an assignment of rights of recovery for a loss to the extent that payment is made by us.

If an assignment is sought, an “insured” must sign and deliver all related papers and cooperate with us.
Since there is no reason for an insured to waive, before a loss, its rights to grants from FEMA or a charity like the Salvation Army or the Red Cross, it appears that a homeowners insurer may have a right to an assignment of the rights of its insured to FEMA or charitable grants so that the insured does not profit from the disaster. The homeowners policy has no apportionment language with regard to such grants and usually FEMA or the charities will not give grants if they know insurance exists. The terms of the grant and the terms of the insurance policy should control.

In most disasters FEMA and/or the Red Cross will arrange for housing and food for the victims. If those victims also have a homeowners policy with coverage for additional living expenses it would be improper and a payment in excess of indemnity if those insureds recovered additional living expenses from their insurers without providing an offset for the money received from FEMA since the insured would not have actually incurred a loss.

The most draconian approach to the concept of a set-off as a result of a right of subrogation or salvage resulted from claims after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States. As a result of the attack US Airways was prevented by government order from flying into or out of Reagan International Airport. As a result it made claim to its insurers for business lost as a result of the governmental action, an insured against peril.