Plaintiff, whose original complaint sought only declaratory and injunctive relief, concededly not covered by any relevant insurance, solely against defendant/third-party plaintiff Lafayette Studios Corp., moved in November 1995 to amend the complaint in the main action herein to add the members of Lafayette's board of directors as additional defendants and to assert various causes of action seeking monetary damages against Lafayette and the proposed additional defendants. Lafayette thereupon requested that BB, its insurance broker, refer the claims sought to be asserted in the proposed amended complaint to "the appropriate insurance carrier ", and BB notified Atlantic, which had issued Lafayette a policy for the period from July 1, 1994 to July 1, 1995, including directors-and-officers coverage applying to claims "first made" during the policy period. Atlantic initially stated that it would provide a defense to Lafayette and the board members, but never assumed control of the defense. In April 1997, after the motion to amend was granted by this Court (see, 234 A.D.2d 146) and the amended complaint served, Atlantic disclaimed coverage on the ground that the purportedly covered claims asserted in the amended complaint were first made after the expiration of Atlantic's policy period. Firemen's, which had issued Lafayette a policy providing similar coverage for the period from July 1, 1995 to July 1, 1996, received no notice of the claims until April 1997, when the claims were referred to it following Atlantic's disclaimer, whereupon Firemen's disclaimed coverage based on the insureds' failure to notify it of the claims "as soon as practicable ", as required by the terms of its policy.
We conclude that the 17-month delay in notifying Firemen's of the relevant claims, from the time plaintiff moved to amend the complaint in November 1995 until April 1997, was unreasonable as a matter of law, therefore vitiating coverage under the terms of the Firemen's policy, and it is no excuse that the delay was caused by the error of the insured's broker in initially notifying the wrong carrier (see, e.g., Security Mut. Ins. Co. of New York v. Acker-Fitzsimmons Corp., 31 N.Y.2d 436, 440, 442 n3; Shaw Temple A.M.E. Zion Church v. Mount Vernon Fire Ins. Co., 199 A.D.2d 374, 376). We disagree that Atlantic's mere statement that it would provide a defense, without more, estops it to deny coverage, since Lafayette's agent, B B, unilaterally made the initial determination to look to Atlantic for coverage, without relying on Atlantic in any way, and, since Lafayette did not rely to its detriment on Atlantic by transferring control of its defense to the insurer, the element of detrimental reliance needed to support a claim of estoppel is lacking (see generally, Nassau Trust Co. v. Montrose Concrete Prods. Corp., 56 N.Y.2d 175, 184, lv denied 57 N.Y.2d 674). Lafayette is entitled to recover against B B all damages caused by BB's negligent referral of the claim to the wrong insurer, i.e., the costs of defense and indemnity equivalent to what Firemen's would have provided had it been timely notified, and the reasonable costs of prosecuting this third-party action against Atlantic and Firemen's as a reasonable effort to mitigate damages (cf., American Motorists Ins. Co. v. Salvatore, 102 A.D.2d 342, 346).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.