We received a request for a blog related to decisions on roof matching under homeowner’s policies of insurance. In 1997 the Insurance Commissioner’s Office of Montana took a position on roof matching under the contractual duty to make a policyholder “whole” again, and the query was whether Montana had case law or statutory provisions at this time that codifies that practice. Continue Reading
Fires, and especially the recent California wildfires, are going to raise questions related to the long-term impact of fire, smoke, and the effects of smoke particulates on electrical gadgets, computers, and apparatus. We live in a day when computers and small computer chips are in virtually everything electrical or mechanical. It is an obvious question after a fire whether the smoke causes these fine electrical machines and gadgets to break down in the long or short term. Continue Reading
Policyholders should take care not to unwittingly fall within their policy’s vacancy exclusion. Continue Reading
California wildfires are prominent in the news. Many are rightfully concerned about the dangers posed from flames, heat and active smoke. However, soot and debris left in fire damaged buildings pose a significant and often overlooked danger. Continue Reading
In the New York class action suit, Mazzocki v. State Farm, 1 A.D.3d 9 (N.Y. 3rd Dept. 2003), the Appellate Court for the Third Department finally clarified the question regarding overhead and profit in actual cash value and replacement cost value claims. Continue Reading
In a recent appellate decision out of the Court of Appeals of Texas in Beaumont, the appellate court affirmed a jury verdict for the Defendant insurance company.1 The case centered on damage from Hurricane Ike that resulted from water entering the home from separations between a door and its frame, specifically, the wind from the storm effectively removed the weather stripping around the insureds’ French doors. Continue Reading
Previously, Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal found that homeowners who had their sinkhole claim denied by their insurance company, but who ultimately prevailed at a jury trial could not be paid their $168,000.00 judgment until they entered a contract to repair their home.1 The court reasoned that because the policy and Florida sinkhole statutes provide for the immediate payment of Actual Cash Value (i.e., above ground repairs) but condition payment for foundation repair and ground stabilization on receiving a contract, the court must enforce that provision of the policy. The court found that since the homeowners chose to enforce the contract by suing Citizens for breach of contract, once the jury found there was coverage, the trial court was obligated to enforce the policy—even the policy’s restriction on Citizens payment to its insured, post-judgment.2 Continue Reading
The Ruskin National Weather Service in conjunction with the Port Heavy Weather Advisory Group, which covers West Florida, published the attached recap of the 2017 Hurricane Season. I thought it was a great summary of what happened and discusses the major storms we faced during the 2017 Hurricane Season.
The summary warns that La Niña is expected to continue this winter and will bring fierce winds during winter storms. If it continues for the 2018 Hurricane season, we can expect similar above average hurricane activity.
Thought For The Day
“Prediction is very difficult, especially if it’s about the future.”
—Nils Bohr, Nobel Recipient in Physics
An Illinois homeowner recently contacted me regarding an insurer’s denial of a water damage claim. The facts were: An underground pipe which was part of a municipal water supply system (“the water main”) burst and water was released from the water main. The pressure from the water cracked the street pavement and water flowed onto the pavement, travelled across the pavement, and then down the sloped driveway leading into the garage of the insured dwelling. Ultimately, the water flowed into the lower level of the home, damaging building materials and personal property. Continue Reading
The buzz amongst policyholders about what insurance owe for additional living expenses due to the Northern California Wildfires is still going strong as Southern California braces this week for Santa Ana winds. With predicted gusts up to 70 mph, Southern Californians are in real danger of the potential for wildfires. Recently, I’ve received quite a few calls from victims of the Northern California wildfires asking what their rights are under their additional living expenses portion of their insurance policies. Most policies limit policyholders to one year of additional living expenses (ALE) or the reasonable time to rebuild. In the recent Northern California wildfires, California Governor Jerry Brown declared a State of Emergency which means that every policyholder with proper additional living expense coverage under their policy has an extension of an additional year for ALE. Continue Reading