Still believe this verdict (a) contravened by the facts and (b) will be overturned on appeal.
Do agree w/ Judge no malice or fraud involved.
Local jury provided sympathy verdict to aging locals whose home was wiped out by a direct hit from the largest hurricane in memory – can you say ” force majeur”
You should probably be more knowledgeable prior to making inaccurate posts. There was an eyewitness neighbor who testified that the wind destroyed much of the dwelling and appurtenances prior to the tidal surge
You should get all the facts also, another eyewitness neighbor testified very little wind damage prior to the water. His photographs and video were entered into evidence. I suggest you look again at the photo’s of the Lisanby’s home. Water, not wind!
Photos taken after the fact are useless. One neighbor actually stayed thru the entire storm and saw the damage occur. As an adjuster I understand that in most cases the storm surge is the main culprit, but historically payments have been made on the wind policy based upon the estimated wind damge which WOULD LOGICALLY HAVE OCCURRED before the surge. In this case much of the guesswork is removd with an eyewitness. It is just recently that the insurors have attempted to remove liability from themselves for wind damage based on concurrent causation language.
I have little sympathy for the carriers as they have brought it upon themselves, liberlaizing policies, using lax underwriting and in general attempting to repesent themselves as the “GOOD HANDS”, GOOD NEIGHBOR”, “NATIONWIDE IS ON YOUR SIDE” kind of entities. When in reality they have been taken over by bean counters whose only objective is the bottom line.
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.
Still believe this verdict (a) contravened by the facts and (b) will be overturned on appeal.
Do agree w/ Judge no malice or fraud involved.
Local jury provided sympathy verdict to aging locals whose home was wiped out by a direct hit from the largest hurricane in memory – can you say ” force majeur”
You should probably be more knowledgeable prior to making inaccurate posts. There was an eyewitness neighbor who testified that the wind destroyed much of the dwelling and appurtenances prior to the tidal surge
You should get all the facts also, another eyewitness neighbor testified very little wind damage prior to the water. His photographs and video were entered into evidence. I suggest you look again at the photo’s of the Lisanby’s home. Water, not wind!
Photos taken after the fact are useless. One neighbor actually stayed thru the entire storm and saw the damage occur. As an adjuster I understand that in most cases the storm surge is the main culprit, but historically payments have been made on the wind policy based upon the estimated wind damge which WOULD LOGICALLY HAVE OCCURRED before the surge. In this case much of the guesswork is removd with an eyewitness. It is just recently that the insurors have attempted to remove liability from themselves for wind damage based on concurrent causation language.
I have little sympathy for the carriers as they have brought it upon themselves, liberlaizing policies, using lax underwriting and in general attempting to repesent themselves as the “GOOD HANDS”, GOOD NEIGHBOR”, “NATIONWIDE IS ON YOUR SIDE” kind of entities. When in reality they have been taken over by bean counters whose only objective is the bottom line.