Like many other agencies we took a hit on this storm. With the number of claims we have paid in recent years, it has caused us to start looking at factors contributing to the severity of the claims. In one recent case we found that a drain gravity drain in the basement that was supposed to be installed during the original construction was missing. (the home was four years old. We also found that the sump pump failed and was still under warranty. The carrier did not subrogate on either issue.
On a separate claim we lost two cars in a lower level garage due to a garage drain. Additional damage to the home result from water coming in the front door. The carrier paid on both and currently we are at $90,000. and still counting. Two things in this case and those are the drain in the garage. In most homes drains in the garage are prohibited due to possible leakage from the vehicles. Not a big point but are the building inspectors sleeping? The big issue is the water through the front door. In the past carriers have denied claims like this because it was deemed to be a flood. But more important is the development of the sub division itself. Why was construction permitted where storm drains were not adequate?
It seems that the construction standards are circumvented by the developer and the inspectors are turning a blind eye and those responsible are not being held accountable. Subrogation is likewise an issue, there are many opportunities for recovery that go unaddressed, with excuses as to why not, most of those involve legal expense. I understand the expenses, but its time to draw a line in the sand. The problems are not going to stop with expensive software or like products that claim to predict claims.
Those products and vendors come at a cost too.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Like many other agencies we took a hit on this storm. With the number of claims we have paid in recent years, it has caused us to start looking at factors contributing to the severity of the claims. In one recent case we found that a drain gravity drain in the basement that was supposed to be installed during the original construction was missing. (the home was four years old. We also found that the sump pump failed and was still under warranty. The carrier did not subrogate on either issue.
On a separate claim we lost two cars in a lower level garage due to a garage drain. Additional damage to the home result from water coming in the front door. The carrier paid on both and currently we are at $90,000. and still counting. Two things in this case and those are the drain in the garage. In most homes drains in the garage are prohibited due to possible leakage from the vehicles. Not a big point but are the building inspectors sleeping? The big issue is the water through the front door. In the past carriers have denied claims like this because it was deemed to be a flood. But more important is the development of the sub division itself. Why was construction permitted where storm drains were not adequate?
It seems that the construction standards are circumvented by the developer and the inspectors are turning a blind eye and those responsible are not being held accountable. Subrogation is likewise an issue, there are many opportunities for recovery that go unaddressed, with excuses as to why not, most of those involve legal expense. I understand the expenses, but its time to draw a line in the sand. The problems are not going to stop with expensive software or like products that claim to predict claims.
Those products and vendors come at a cost too.