Water damage: the denial record

Didion's estimate is $2,908,503.89, less the $10,000.00 policy deductible, recoverable depreciation in the amount of $648,327.21, and items which fall under Ordinance or Law Coverage in the amount of $132,306.72.

The lowball estimate totaled only $7,362.76, and resulted in a payment of just $6,362.76 for the substantial loss.

Whereas, the carrier furnished a wrongful estimate and, having withheld the deductible, offered a deficient payment in the amount of $14,489.84 only, leaving a remainder in the amount of $246,225.69 to be paid in order to cure the breach, less any applicable policy deductible.

On or about September 25, 2023, Property Claim Consultants produced an estimate assessing the damages at $248,326.51.

Subsequently, the insureds prepared a loss package in the amount of $219,186.98 needed to restore the property back to its pre-loss condition.

In addition, the Insureds submitted their coverage A loss valuation via a rebuild estimate totaling $213,726.80.

THE DISPARITY BETWEEN CYPRESS' VALUATION AND FAIRWINDS' ESTIMATE OF $188,152.14 HIGHLIGHTS THIS POINT AND DEMONSTRATES CYPRESS' FAILURE TO PROPERLY ASSESS THE FULL EXTENT OF THE LOSS.

Subsequently, the insured prepared a loss package in the amount of $187,772.08 needed to restore the property back to its pre-loss condition.

In total, the estimate recognizes $172,125.36 in repairs necessary to restore the Property to its pre-loss condition.

After assessing the damage and the true scope of repairs, the public adjuster produced an estimate identifying $170,202.31 in covered damage to the dwelling.

Subsequently, the claimant prepared a loss package in the amount of $ 167,938.18 needed to restore the property back to its pre-loss condition.

Given the emergency nature of the damage, the Insured retained water mitigation service who prepared an estimate identifying $2,998.82 to perform initial remediation services.

Stellar inspected the property and found $162,867.28 worth of damages to the dwelling.

Mr. [name redacted] inspected the property and prepared an estimate which failed to account for the full scope and price of the damage, particularly to the interior, where only $7,818.51 was allotted for replacement cost of all interior damages.

The Carrier misrepresented to the Insured that the resulting interior damage fell under the Policy's $6,570 deductible.

After assessing the damage and the true scope of repairs, the public adjuster prepared an estimate identifying $129,020.41 in covered damage to the dwelling.

Stellar inspected the property and prepared an estimate totaling $124,774.08, and submitted this estimate along with photos and other documentation to Universal.

Winborne's single inspection, the Insurance Company accepted coverage for the loss and issued payment to the Insureds for only $20,305.23.

Stellar inspected the property and prepared an estimate totaling $113,397.75.

Following the May 16, 2024, inspection, by Michael E Peyton, FL [name redacted] #W122720 INSURER advised INSURED that their damages only totaled $9,360.55 Actual Cash Value, and after depreciation and Policy deductible, undisputed insurance benefits in the amount of $6,860.55 would be tendered.

After assessing the damage and the true scope of repairs, the public adjuster produced an estimate identifying $101,319.01 in covered damage to the dwelling.

On or about February 18, 2025, Public Adjuster produced a professional estimate totaling $100,871.16 in Actual Cash Value.

Specifically, the Insureds, with assistance from their public adjuster, submitted an estimate for $98,485.73, which was a fair and reasonable assessment for the repair/replacement of damages.

This field adjuster's name does not appear on their estimate, which completely failed to account for the scope of the damages.

Typtap failed to properly adopt and implement standards to open new claims, properly assign a claim number to a matter reported to them, and conduct an adequate investigation regarding their Insured's property.

Therefore, demand is hereby made as follows: Estimate $92,966.38 Less Deductible $1,000.00 Less Prior Payments $10,071.85 TOTAL $81,894.53.

After assessing the damage and the true scope of repairs, the public adjuster prepared an estimate identifying $88,747.74 in covered damage to the dwelling and $213.57 in damage to contents.

Further, additional repairs performed by [name redacted] for which Mr. [name redacted] paid in excess of $22,000 failed to address these leaks.

Specifically, the Insured, with assistance from their public adjuster, submitted an estimate for $87,058.77, which was a fair and reasonable assessment for the repair/replacement of damages.

Specifically, the Insureds, with assistance from their public adjuster, submitted an estimate for $87,022.20, which was a fair and reasonable assessment for the repair/replacement of damages.

On July 29, 2022, the Insurer sent a letter to the Insureds advising that the damages to the Property totaled $17,513.67.

After the carrier's inspection, UNIVERSAL PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY opened coverage for the loss and offered a miniscule payment of $7,912.21 to repair all the damages.

B&B [name redacted] sofa replacement: $56,094.75 (manufacturer's quote) 2.

The Insureds subsequently contacted [name redacted] P.A., who conducted a thorough inspection of the property and compiled an estimate of damages. [name redacted] P.A., on behalf of the Insureds, forwarded said estimate which fully detailed the Insureds' damages and total $73,983.13.

ASI sent out an unqualified adjuster who wrote up an estimate of damages in the amount of $4,904.07.

After the carrier's inspection, USAA GENERAL INDEMNITY COMPANY opened coverage for the loss and offered a miniscule payment of $17,991.22 to repair all the damages.

The insured's representative determined there were damages and repairs necessary to restore the property to its pre-loss condition and submitted claim-related documentation to OLYMPUS INSURANCE COMPANY, including a detailed estimate for repairs for $70,582.02.

Subsequently, the insureds prepared a loss package in the amount of $70,318.01 needed to restore the property back to its pre-loss condition.

On March 8, 2024 365 days after the first notice of loss HCPCI issued a partial denial letter, offering a mere $10,000.00 under the Mold Coverage limit, while refusing to pay for the full extent of the water damage, including necessary repairs to return the property to its pre-loss condition.

Subsequently, the insureds prepared a loss package in the amount of $60,721.93 needed to restore the property back to its pre-loss condition.

Restoration Control also took a plethora of photographs of the property before, during and after its services, and prepared an estimate of damages to put the property back into its pre-loss condition in the amount of $68,210.78.

Specifically, the Insured, with assistance from their public adjuster, submitted an estimate for $67,395.80, which was a fair and reasonable assessment for the repair/replacement of damages.

ILGPA, on behalf of the Insured, forwarded said estimate which fully detailed the Insured's damages and total $67,200.41.

Even if the disputed labor costs were excluded, Insurer's revised coverage determination still fell over $55,847.40 short of the Public Adjuster's estimate after accounting for deductibles and the prior payment.

Finally, on December 19, 2024, over a month since the EUO, FRONTLINE issued a coverage letter and provided FRONTLINE's low-ball estimate of $1,446.86, which is below the Insured's $2,500.00 deductible.

Tropical Loss Consultants prepared an XACTIMATE estimate for the total damages to the Property totaling $65,126.30, which accurately reflects the damages suffered at the Property as the result of the air conditioning leak.

Specifically, the Insured, with assistance from their public adjuster, submitted an estimate for $63,870.70, which is a fair and reasonable assessment for the repair/replacement of damages.

Due to the extent of the water damage sustained to the garage, kitchen, laundry room, dining room, living room, hallway, and foyer, the Claimant obtained an estimate for $63,308.66.

Castle Key estimated the cost to return the property to its pre-loss condition in the amount of $11,871.23, before application of the deductible.

Due to the extent of the damage sustained to the roof, patio enclosure, and the interior water damage sustained to the kitchen, living room, dining room, entry area, sub-room, and hallway, Claimant hired a public adjuster who provided an estimate for $57,822.70 in covered damages.

Whereas, the carrier furnished a wrongful estimate and, having withheld the deductible, offered a deficient payment in the amount of $301.03 only, leaving a remainder in the amount of $53,973.61 to be paid in order to cure the breach, less any applicable policy deductible.

The Insured's roofer questioned the amount of loss and a revised estimate was prepared totaling $18,336.24 RCV.

Loss Restorations LLC has an outstanding balance in the amount of $13,700.31 for their mitigation services and tarp placement.

An estimate in the amount of amount of $52,267.96 was provided to the carrier.

However, the Insurer wrongfully determined that it would only require $1,192.67 to restore the insured property to its pre-loss condition, which failed to exceed the policy deductible.

After application of the deductible and recoverable depreciation, the Insurer made payment to the Insured in the amount of $13,315.19.

The insured provided the carrier with estimates as well as photographs of all the damages and an estimate in the amount of $49,129.36.

Specifically, the Insureds, with assistance from their public adjuster, submitted an estimate for $48,038.21, which was a fair and reasonable assessment for the repair/replacement of damages.

State Farm Florida Insurance Company (carrier) has not attempted in good faith to settle the insured's claim when, under all the circumstances, it could and should have done so, had it acted fairly and honestly toward its insured and with due regard for their interests.

TypTap initially made a low-ball coverage decision that broadly ignored the damage sustained to the Property valuing the damage at $4,216.08 after the application of the deductible.