Thanks for the clarification on houseboat and boathouse. From my part of the country we call those things \”docks\”. But I see where you are coming from. I guess the insured\’s claimed the boathouse to be on the insured property and when the property got inspected the insurance company realized it was on the other property and bang they got caught or just an honest mistake. We will never know and I guess the jury will have to decide how innocent this entire situation is.
I think proving the location of the boathouse (I keep wanting to type houseboat) would be easy since the support beams will still be buried deep into the silt and likely not broken off.
The article posted by the famously comprehensive IJ states that the insureds are not debating the location of the boathouse, or where it was in relation to the insured property line.
They\’re claiming that they were told it was insured, and so it should be and Allstate can\’t deny the claim based on misrep.
OK, time for me to chime in….I\’m going to have to disagree with Mjolnir on part of this one. For the judge to take the position she did, I have a feeling they tried to present the boathouse as being part of the original property and not under the adjacent land. If you\’ve been around many \”misrep trials\”, you better have your ducks in a row before a judge will allow that position to be taken by the jury. Otherwise, this would strictly be an E&O claim like Mjolnir has stated and they could pursue their remedy that way. Like Paul Harvey always say….\”and now for the rest of the story\”….
Good point about part of the structure probably still being in the water… But apparently that is not the problem according to Mjolnir.
Mjolnir-
Well, I didn\’t decipher that from the article. I guess it left out quite a lot of details. Thank you for the extra information.
I guess if we had the mentality of some posters we could say all agents are inept instead of just this one (luckily we don\’t). However, how do we know the agent told them that it was covered? I have come across many people who would say someone told them something and it simply wasn\’t true. I don\’t know who said what… Do you have any more information?
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.
Thanks for the clarification on houseboat and boathouse. From my part of the country we call those things \”docks\”. But I see where you are coming from. I guess the insured\’s claimed the boathouse to be on the insured property and when the property got inspected the insurance company realized it was on the other property and bang they got caught or just an honest mistake. We will never know and I guess the jury will have to decide how innocent this entire situation is.
I think proving the location of the boathouse (I keep wanting to type houseboat) would be easy since the support beams will still be buried deep into the silt and likely not broken off.
The article posted by the famously comprehensive IJ states that the insureds are not debating the location of the boathouse, or where it was in relation to the insured property line.
They\’re claiming that they were told it was insured, and so it should be and Allstate can\’t deny the claim based on misrep.
Again- they\’re agent better have sufficient E&O.
OK, time for me to chime in….I\’m going to have to disagree with Mjolnir on part of this one. For the judge to take the position she did, I have a feeling they tried to present the boathouse as being part of the original property and not under the adjacent land. If you\’ve been around many \”misrep trials\”, you better have your ducks in a row before a judge will allow that position to be taken by the jury. Otherwise, this would strictly be an E&O claim like Mjolnir has stated and they could pursue their remedy that way. Like Paul Harvey always say….\”and now for the rest of the story\”….
Steve-
Good point about part of the structure probably still being in the water… But apparently that is not the problem according to Mjolnir.
Mjolnir-
Well, I didn\’t decipher that from the article. I guess it left out quite a lot of details. Thank you for the extra information.
I guess if we had the mentality of some posters we could say all agents are inept instead of just this one (luckily we don\’t). However, how do we know the agent told them that it was covered? I have come across many people who would say someone told them something and it simply wasn\’t true. I don\’t know who said what… Do you have any more information?
Thank you!
It\’s called selective memory. My agent never told me that.