Vacation Home Complete Loss

• The Davis family had coverage on both their primary dwelling in Portland as well as their vacation home in Tumalo. Both homes were insured by Fireman’s Fund and both covered their property worldwide without location limitations. However, Fireman’s Fund took the position that they would not allow the Davis’ to combine the coverages. What would Greenspan Adjusters International, Inc. have to do to convince Fireman’s Fund to change their stance?
• Fireman’s Fund refused to pay living allowances for the family. Was that a correct application of the policy provisions?
• At the time of the fire, Gail, a talented artist, had an extensive personal art collection in the home. The settlement proposed by Fireman’s Fund would not be near enough to replace the impressive body of work. How could Greenspan Adjusters International, Inc. get Fireman’s Fund to more accurately assess the value of Gail’s artwork and the family’s personal belongings?

• The Davis family had insured both of their homes with Fireman’s Fund; the main dwelling with a $750,000 property limit and the vacation home with $500,000. It is common in instances of property loss to extend a percentage of coverage from the main dwelling to the vacation home, but Fireman’s Fund would not allow an extension. Adjusters International reviewed the policy and found no mention of limiting the extra coverage to the vacation home. In the end, Fireman’s Fund was persuaded to apply the higher personal property limit from the main dwelling to the vacation home.
• The first steps taken by Adjusters International to address the insufficient personal property offer from Fireman’s Fund was to assemble a personal property team. Fireman’s Fund had overlooked many of the items in the house, including the large collection of expensive and irreplaceable artwork. Adjusters International’s in-house inventory specialist was able to search through receipts, artwork appraisals, and photos to persuade the insurance company to increase their personal property offer to $520,000, almost double the original amount.
• To prove that the Davis family was owed additional living expenses, Adjusters International had to first change the insurance company’s mindset. Fireman’s Fund refused to pay for living expenses given that the loss was to the family’s vacation home. Adjusters International proved that the Davis family’s standard of living included having a vacation home to visit at their convenience. The Davis family spent a significant portion of the year at the vacation home, and Adjusters International was able to demonstrate to Fireman’s Fund that the family was owed additional compensation for their loss. Fireman’s Fund eventually paid an additional $30,000 in living expenses to rent a vacation property for the family.

Before Adjusters International was retained, the Davis family was offered $350,000. With the addition of Adjusters International, to the Davis family’s team, they were offered $1,400,000, which is four-times more than what Fireman’s Fund originally offered.