<p>NYMomof2, that’s the whole point of insurance - to pay for your property whether you’re negligent or not. Otherwise, can you imagine the litigation? “You had a short in your wiring that you should have discovered before your house burned down, so we’re not paying on your homeowner’s insurance.” If you had to prove that you weren’t negligent before collecting insurance, no one would buy it.</p>
<p>Now, if someone else files a claim against you saying that you caused an injury (a liability claim), that’s when negligence comes into play. A third party does have to prove that you were negligent before they could collect against your insurance.</p>
<p>So in this case, the boy’s laptop should be covered (of course, depending on the particulars of the policy) without regard to negligence. But if the OP’s d were to file the proposed claim for personal injury or property damage against the boy, the insurer would require the OP’s d to prove that the boy was negligent.</p>
<p>Does that make sense?</p>