New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Insurance Law § 3407 (2026)

Property insurance; proofs of loss; notice of loss

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 3407. Property insurance; proofs of loss; notice of loss. (a) The
failure of any person insured against loss or damage to property under
any contract of insurance, issued or delivered in this state or covering
property located in this state, to furnish proofs of loss to the insurer
or insurers as specified in such contract shall not invalidate or
diminish any claim of such person insured under such contract, unless
such insurer or insurers shall, after such loss or damage, give to such
insured a written notice that it or they desire proofs of loss to be
furnished by such insured to such insurer or insurers on a suitable
blank form or forms. If the insured shall furnish proofs of loss within
sixty days after the receipt of such notice and such form or forms, or
within any longer period of time specified in such notice, such insured
shall be deemed to have complied with the provisions of such contract of
insurance relating to the time within which proofs of loss are required.
Neither the giving of such notice nor the furnishing of such blank form
or forms by the insurer shall constitute a waiver of any stipulation or
condition of such contract, or an admission of liability thereunder.
  (b) If any contract of insurance issued or delivered in this state,
covering loss of or damage to property by fire provides that the insured
give immediate notice, in writing, to the insurer, of any loss or
damage, it shall be sufficient compliance if immediate written notice is
given, by or on behalf of the insured, to any licensed agent of the
insurer in this state, with particulars sufficient to identify the
insured and the property insured under such contract and to notify the
insurer of the time and place of such loss or damage.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 49 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1986–2025 · leading case: Armstrong v. United Frontier Mut. Ins. Co., 2020 NY Slip Op 2013 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Armstrong v. United Frontier Mut. Ins. Co., 2020 NY Slip Op 2013 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020). · cites it 3× “The issue then becomes whether the use of a sworn form was required under the policy and Insurance Law § 3407 (a). We note that, absent a requirement "in either the Insurance Law or the policy herein" that plaintiff submit a sworn proof of loss, no such requirement could be…”

Bailey v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins., 133 A.D.2d 915 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987). · cites it 3× “Defendant’s answer to plaintiffs’ complaint contained five affirmative defenses, two of which related to plaintiffs’ failure to provide proof of loss within 60 days of the written demand as required by Insurance Law § 3407 and the terms of the insurance policy.”

Ball v. Allstate Ins., 611 N.E.2d 750 (NY 1993). · cites it 2× “Insurance Law § 3407 provides that the failure to furnish proofs of loss as specified in a contract of insurance shall not result in a forfeiture or diminution of a claim unless the insurer gives the insured written notice that it requires proofs of loss.”

Ingarra v. Gen. Accident/PG Ins., 273 A.D.2d 766 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000). · cites it 2× “It is well settled that an insured’s failure to submit a sworn proof of loss within 60 days after receiving a demand to do so by its insurer, accompanied by blank proof of loss forms, provides a complete defense to an action for payment on an insurance policy (see, Insurance Law…”

Gongolewsky v. Empire Ins., 51 A.D.3d 720 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008). · cites it 3× “Empire moved for leave to amend its answer to allege that the plaintiff failed to file a timely proof of loss, despite due demand, as required by Insurance Law § 3407 (a), and for summary judgment dismissing the complaint based on that defense.”

Pedrick v. Com. Union Ins., 134 Misc. 2d 313 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1986). · cites it 3× “The first affirmative defense, and the basis for this summary judgment motion, is that plaintiff failed to comply with the policy provision requiring submission of sworn proofs of loss within 60 days after receipt of the demand required by Insurance Law § 3407 (former § 172).…”

Harris v. Allstate Ins., 83 F. Supp. 2d 423 (S.D.N.Y. 2000). · cites it 2× “) Plaintiff further admits that he received notice via letter dated October 17, 1997 that Allstate was disclaiming coverage for the loss of his car based on his breach of policy conditions relating to fraud and sworn proof of loss.”

Anthony Marino Constr. Corp. v. INA Underwriters Ins., 505 N.E.2d 944 (NY 1987). “, 63 NY2d 201, 216 ; Insurance Law § 3407 [a]). Plaintiff’s contentions that defendants should be estopped from relying on the proof of loss condition because their demand letter did not state the date by which the proofs had to be filed and because it also contained a demand…”

SR Int'l Bus. Ins. v. World Trade Ctr. Props., LLC, 381 F. Supp. 2d 250 (S.D.N.Y. 2005). “to furnish proofs of loss to the insurer or insurers as specified in such contract shall not invalidate or diminish any claim of such person insured under such contract, unless such insurer or insurers shall, after such loss or damage, give to such insured a written notice that…”

Rosalie Estates, Inc. v. Colonia Ins., 227 A.D.2d 335 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996). “While a public claims adjuster may, under proper circumstances, serve as an agent for service of a demand for proof of loss pursuant to Insurance Law § 3407 (see, Esa v New York Prop.”

Turkow v. Erie Ins., 20 A.D.3d 649 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005). “Finding questions of fact, Supreme Court denied that motion, prompting this appeal. Initially, we are unpersuaded that defendant established, as a matter of law, that plaintiff breached the contract condition requiring a signed and sworn proof of loss statement.”

Hedaya Home Fashions, Inc. v. Am. Motorists Ins., 12 A.D.3d 639 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004). “Since the appellant failed to serve a demand for proof of loss, choosing instead to deny coverage, it waived the provisions of Insurance Law § 3407 (a), thus, the plaintiffs were not required to file a proof of loss statement as a condition precedent to coverage (see Han-Ki Lee…”

Show all 49 citing cases →

— N.Y. Insurance Law § 3407(a) — 7 cases

Harris v. Allstate Ins., 83 F. Supp. 2d 423 (S.D.N.Y. 2000). “) Plaintiff further admits that he received notice via letter dated October 17, 1997 that Allstate was disclaiming coverage for the loss of his car based on his breach of policy conditions relating to fraud and sworn proof of loss.”

Varda, Inc. v. Ins. Co. of North Am., 701 F. Supp. 57 (S.D.N.Y. 1988).

Fox-Knapp, Inc. v. Employers Mut. Cas. Co., 725 F. Supp. 706 (S.D.N.Y. 1989).

Akter v. Interboro Ins. Co., 2024 NY Slip Op 51483(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Bronx Cty. 2024).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.