After 8 years of being a customer of General Casualty Insurance, a large scale storm tore through my area causing extensive damage to my property - 2 fallen trees, fascia twisted, a gutter torn off, leaks into the home and shingles damaged by hail and high winds, some twisted, and torn off.
6 different roofing companies viewed the damage and stated that the entire roof needed to be replaced due to storm damage, so I filed a claim with General Casualty.
Brock Restoration was assigned by the insurance company to address the leaks. The provided a blower and dehumidifier for 3 days and were supposed to tarp the area for protection until the inspector could approve the roof repair. The tarp was not placed, which resulted in additional leakage from subsequent rain storms. It took 3 weeks for General Casualty to grant approval for a roofer to provide tarping.
The inspector came out and allowed for rear and side roof replacement but only a small amount for drywall repair and front roof repair. It took several calls for him to come back out and meet with my roofer and me. He asked if Brock could have caused the leakage, however I explained that was not the case since the leaks were the reason the claim was filed in the first place. He asked later if I thought they increased the damage and my response was that the storm caused the leakage, although Brock did fail to tarp/cover the area. The inspector found numerous holes in my roof when he climbed up there (indicative of hail), which was part of the storm. He agreed that the full roof needed replacement. I later found out he falsified a report that stated I had claimed that Brock Restoration caused further damage.
General Casualty refused to pay for replacement for the front roof where the leaks were actually occurring, because they claim it was "at or near the end of its useful life" despite the fact that the roof was only 15 years old with 20-year shingles. Wind and hail are covered perils in the policy; however, General Casualty apparently decided that it was pure coincidence that the leakage occurred right after that storm. Minor Hurricane Ike repairs were done in without mention that the roof would need replacement soon due to deterioration.
My agent was unable to get responses via email or phone from General Casualty so he suggested I contact the Indiana Department of Insurance (IDOI). General Casualty provided pictures of hail damage to the rear of the roof but would not acknowledge photos that I provided that showed identical damage to the front of the roof. I contacted a lawyer in September to help resolve the problems, but their sole response to him was to send a copy of my policy.
I had to pay for the front roof repairs out of my own pocket ($5000) because I had to get it fixed before winter. General Casualty let the IDOI know that I could request an appraisal through the umpire clause, but this would cost me almost as much money as the repair cost itself. I question their actions here since they refused to even talk with the agent who assigned me to this company.
In addition to them not paying the full claim, they also nearly doubled my premiums for renewal. General Casualty also submitted my claim as "physical damage" to the reporting agency, Lexis Nexis, which increases premiums. It wasn't until I pushed for corrections, that the storm caused the damage, that it was changed to "wind damage" which does not affect premiums.
Problem Summary:
Failure to provide timely tarping to prevent additional water damage/leakage to multiple areas inside home
Failure to provide sufficient claims payment for repair/replacement of damaged drywall
Falsification of claimant report regarding the cause of leakage
Refusal to pay for repairs to front roof area despite the fact that the damage was identical to the covered damage to the rear and side of the roof
Refusal to cooperate with communications with both the insurance agent and my attorney
Falsification of Lexis-Nexis report resulting in inappropriately high premium costs
0 comments