Is Your Homeowner’s Insurance Company Acting Unethically?
We recently filed a claim with our homeowner’s insurance due to ash and smoke damage that forced us to leave our home. The insurance company provided a $15,000 advance under our “loss of use” coverage to cover hotel stays and meals during our relocation. Initially, they sent a “trusted vendor” to evaluate the damage, who reported that it would cost $35,000 to clean the ash from the interior and exterior of our home and detached garage, as well as to replace the contaminated insulation in the attic.
However, the insurance company wasn’t satisfied with this valuation and brought in an insurance adjuster to reassess the damage. This adjuster concluded that the necessary repairs would only cost $8,000, a stark contrast to the initial vendor’s estimate, as well as estimates from others we’ve consulted afterward. Based on this assessment, the insurance company issued us an additional $8,000 check.
Here are our concerns:
-
The insurance company seems to acknowledge that their adjuster’s valuation is low, yet they insist that if we want more than $8,000, we must have the repairs completed by a vendor first. This feels unjust—are they allowed to artificially lower the claim value to limit their initial payout? We have extended replacement cost value coverage, and the adjuster’s report indicates there should be no depreciation on the recommended repairs.
-
We’ve been informed that any unspent amount from the $15,000 advance for loss of use will be reallocated to cover our dwelling or personal property losses. This means that even if their assessment indicates our home’s damage exceeds $8,000, they plan to deduct from the loss of use funds to cover the dwelling claims. Is this practice justified?
We’d appreciate any insights or advice from those familiar with insurance claims processes. Thank you!
I’m sorry to hear about the trouble you’re facing with your homeowner’s insurance claim. It can be incredibly frustrating when navigating through these processes, especially after experiencing damage to your home.
Here are some insights regarding your questions:
Regarding the $8k Payment and Vendor Work: Insurance companies often maintain their policies on how they release payments, especially when it comes to claims. In many cases, they may require that you have work done by a vendor before they release additional funds beyond initial payments. However, this can be contentious, especially if there’s a significant discrepancy between the estimates given by their “trusted vendor” and their adjuster’s assessment. If you feel that the adjuster’s estimate is unfairly low, consider providing evidence from other contractors to reinforce your case. Documentation comparing estimates may help in negotiating a fair settlement. Additionally, check your policy language regarding how they handle claims and whether they have the right to require you to have work performed before releasing further funds.
Reallocation of Loss of Use Funds: The practice of reallocating loss of use funds to cover dwelling or personal property damages can be complicated and somewhat controversial. Generally, loss of use coverage is intended to reimburse you for additional living expenses incurred while your home is not habitable—separate from the dwelling’s repair costs. While insurers may have some leeway in how they manage claims, it seems concerning that they would use those funds for dwelling losses without your consent. It might be worth reviewing your policy for specifics on how loss of use payments are handled and whether they have the right to apply those funds in this manner. Reach out to your insurance agent or a legal expert specializing in insurance claims for clarity on your rights and options in this situation.
In summary, documenting your case, seeking additional contractor estimates, and clarifying your policy could potentially help you navigate this complex situation more effectively. Consider reaching out for professional advice if needed. Good luck!