Looks like a really unproductive fishing expedition to me. From the interrogatories, your attorneys have no idea where they are going or what they are trying to find. Just the us of terms such as \”all documents\” is a red flag to an overly broad and burdensome request.
\”dude\” whats your claim? that the SSA accounts are mismanaged? That all that money should be returned immediately to policyholders?
No P&C company is completely \”good\”, but in my experience having claims and handling claims for USAA, they\’ve generally been fair in their dealings. I also appreciate the low rates and a check in the mail every December for my SSA surplus.
Actually, State Farm\’s concurrent causation clause does *not* say that damage from wind is excluded when flood is present, that\’s the position the company took, but it\’s not the actual language in their contract. Senter held them to the contract they wrote, not the one they wished they had written.
[QUOTE]
We do not insure under any coverage for any loss which would not have occurred in the absence of one or more of the following excluded events. We do not insure for such loss regardless of:
(a) the cause of the excluded event; or
(b) other causes of the loss; or
(c) whether other causes acted concurrently or in any sequence with the excluded event to produce the loss; or
(d) whether the event occurs suddenly or gradually, involves isolated or widespread damage, arises from natural or external forces, or occurs as a result of any combination of these: [Listed Exclusions].
[/QUOTE]
If you had wind damage before the storm surge arrived, you would have had wind damage even if the storm surge never arrived. The wind damage is not a \”loss which would not have occurred in the absence of one or more of the following excluded events.\”
Senter simply upheld the wording of the contract — the company admitted there was wind damage, and refused to quantify how much damage was wind and how much was water. Senter read the contract, determined wind was covered, and, without adequate evidence in the record to exclude anything as water damage, he had no choice but to interpret any ambiguity in favor of the policyholder.
That\’s why they got policy limits, because State Farm didn\’t quantify how much damage was wind and how much damage was water.
State Farm Did NOT pay for wind damages.
They blamed all of Katrina damages on Water and that was wrong.
There will always be wind & water in a coastal area, when a hurricane is in that area.
That is why they put the calculating exclusions in the policy. Duh
When has there ever been a hurricane without wind & water?
Not in this life or the next.
In Answer to Question # 1 in \”Defendant\’s Reponses to Plaintiff\’s First Set of Interrogatories to Defendant\”, signed by Russell Scott Esq. and sworn to by USAA\’s litigation counsel Robert Hoagland, it was stated that \” . . as of February 28, 2005, there were 2,120,322 members of USAA.\”
This document, in its entirety. may be downloaded at:
\”Nawlins\”, who posted anonymously on February 1, 2007 at 10:19 PM, is probably a professional \”Spam Commenter\” hired by Robert J. Davis and the United Services Automobile Association to tilt the playing field on \”opinion threads\”, as we have here at the Insurance Journal.
It\’s actually very interesting: the studied way Robert G. Davis has set about suppressing all information about the fact that USAA is an \”unincorporated association\” run by him and a few cronies.
Davis has suppressed all information about how much he and his \”board of directors\” are paid.
And Davis has suppressed all information about the legal case True v United Services Automobile Association: the class-action which is being refiled in US District Court for the Western District of Texas. This class action will bring about the dissolution of USAA: which (to paraphrase and invert T. S. Elliot) will happen with a bang and not a whimper.
My house was severly damaged by Hurricane Katrina. If you are really interested in hearing this amazing story concerning USAA, please contact me at my E-mail address. I share some of the same anger and rage that is displayed in this article. I am currently involved in litigation against USAA and this thief Robert Davis.
I think you might want to take a look at this case and follow it. It is truely and example of how USAA is not servicing their customers and is further evidence of what you are stating in this article.
thanks in advance.
Every time a member gets a homeowner police and/or quote they are advised the policy does not include coverage for flood but they can receive a quote to for coveraged under the NFIP. Members always say ‘I’m not in a flood zone’ and decline quotes even when advised over 20% of flood losses occur in areas not considered to be in flood zones. Even so, the majority don’t even want a quote to see how much it will cost. Alot of homeowners who are in coastal locations still don’t think they are at risk. USAA homeowner policies state that flood coverage is excluded but homeowners see what they want to see but once they have a loss the first thing they say is they didn’t know- even after losses such as Katrina.
Why should a private carrier endorse the federal government and then run the risk of not being reimbursed if they choose to not accept liability? This would cause rates to increase and needless lawsuits. People always say, “I’m in the highest point in my county”, “If I flood… you’ll see Noah float by”, “If it ever floods here we have bigger problems on our hands to worry about rebuilding my home”. I hear these all day and everyday! People need to read their policies and read the exclusions. There are not very many of them w/ most companies. Be grown-ups.
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.
Looks like a really unproductive fishing expedition to me. From the interrogatories, your attorneys have no idea where they are going or what they are trying to find. Just the us of terms such as \”all documents\” is a red flag to an overly broad and burdensome request.
\”dude\” whats your claim? that the SSA accounts are mismanaged? That all that money should be returned immediately to policyholders?
No P&C company is completely \”good\”, but in my experience having claims and handling claims for USAA, they\’ve generally been fair in their dealings. I also appreciate the low rates and a check in the mail every December for my SSA surplus.
Actually, State Farm\’s concurrent causation clause does *not* say that damage from wind is excluded when flood is present, that\’s the position the company took, but it\’s not the actual language in their contract. Senter held them to the contract they wrote, not the one they wished they had written.
[QUOTE]
We do not insure under any coverage for any loss which would not have occurred in the absence of one or more of the following excluded events. We do not insure for such loss regardless of:
(a) the cause of the excluded event; or
(b) other causes of the loss; or
(c) whether other causes acted concurrently or in any sequence with the excluded event to produce the loss; or
(d) whether the event occurs suddenly or gradually, involves isolated or widespread damage, arises from natural or external forces, or occurs as a result of any combination of these: [Listed Exclusions].
[/QUOTE]
If you had wind damage before the storm surge arrived, you would have had wind damage even if the storm surge never arrived. The wind damage is not a \”loss which would not have occurred in the absence of one or more of the following excluded events.\”
Senter simply upheld the wording of the contract — the company admitted there was wind damage, and refused to quantify how much damage was wind and how much was water. Senter read the contract, determined wind was covered, and, without adequate evidence in the record to exclude anything as water damage, he had no choice but to interpret any ambiguity in favor of the policyholder.
That\’s why they got policy limits, because State Farm didn\’t quantify how much damage was wind and how much damage was water.
State Farm Did NOT pay for wind damages.
They blamed all of Katrina damages on Water and that was wrong.
There will always be wind & water in a coastal area, when a hurricane is in that area.
That is why they put the calculating exclusions in the policy. Duh
When has there ever been a hurricane without wind & water?
Not in this life or the next.
In Answer to Question # 1 in \”Defendant\’s Reponses to Plaintiff\’s First Set of Interrogatories to Defendant\”, signed by Russell Scott Esq. and sworn to by USAA\’s litigation counsel Robert Hoagland, it was stated that \” . . as of February 28, 2005, there were 2,120,322 members of USAA.\”
This document, in its entirety. may be downloaded at:
http://www.true-v-usaa.com/true_v_usaa/defendant_responses_07_apr_05.pdf
As they say – \”your serve, Dude\”.
\”Nawlins\”, who posted anonymously on February 1, 2007 at 10:19 PM, is probably a professional \”Spam Commenter\” hired by Robert J. Davis and the United Services Automobile Association to tilt the playing field on \”opinion threads\”, as we have here at the Insurance Journal.
He appears on Wikipedia as \”NawlinWiki\”, here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:NawlinWiki
The whole question of Robert G. Davis\’ use of rent-a-shills and gang-reverts at http://www.wikipedia.org can be reviewed here.
http://rent-a-shills-at-wikipedia.blogspot.com/
It\’s actually very interesting: the studied way Robert G. Davis has set about suppressing all information about the fact that USAA is an \”unincorporated association\” run by him and a few cronies.
Davis has suppressed all information about how much he and his \”board of directors\” are paid.
And Davis has suppressed all information about the legal case True v United Services Automobile Association: the class-action which is being refiled in US District Court for the Western District of Texas. This class action will bring about the dissolution of USAA: which (to paraphrase and invert T. S. Elliot) will happen with a bang and not a whimper.
Gil Finney, is that you?
Curt Clark
Florida
My house was severly damaged by Hurricane Katrina. If you are really interested in hearing this amazing story concerning USAA, please contact me at my E-mail address. I share some of the same anger and rage that is displayed in this article. I am currently involved in litigation against USAA and this thief Robert Davis.
I think you might want to take a look at this case and follow it. It is truely and example of how USAA is not servicing their customers and is further evidence of what you are stating in this article.
thanks in advance.
RJK – you really should get a life
Every time a member gets a homeowner police and/or quote they are advised the policy does not include coverage for flood but they can receive a quote to for coveraged under the NFIP. Members always say ‘I’m not in a flood zone’ and decline quotes even when advised over 20% of flood losses occur in areas not considered to be in flood zones. Even so, the majority don’t even want a quote to see how much it will cost. Alot of homeowners who are in coastal locations still don’t think they are at risk. USAA homeowner policies state that flood coverage is excluded but homeowners see what they want to see but once they have a loss the first thing they say is they didn’t know- even after losses such as Katrina.
Why should a private carrier endorse the federal government and then run the risk of not being reimbursed if they choose to not accept liability? This would cause rates to increase and needless lawsuits. People always say, “I’m in the highest point in my county”, “If I flood… you’ll see Noah float by”, “If it ever floods here we have bigger problems on our hands to worry about rebuilding my home”. I hear these all day and everyday! People need to read their policies and read the exclusions. There are not very many of them w/ most companies. Be grown-ups.