Mold capped after a covered loss

Though this was ultimately not the cause of loss, the fact that Frontline immediately denied the claim and cited "wear, tear, deterioration, inadequate workmanship, maintenance" as the cause is clear evidence that Frontline did not fully or even adequately inspect the Property that it is obligated to provide coverage for, pursuant to the Policy. For example, despite extensive proof of mold damages and costs incurred, Frontline has failed and refused to tender the $10,000 mold cap that is undisputedly owed per the Policy. Frontline has also failed and refused to reimburse the Insureds for their nearly $50,000 in incurred ALE costs, despite being well within policy limits and proof of expenditures submitted to Frontline on numerous occasions.

After assessing the damage and the true scope of repairs, the Insured's retained services prepared reports and estimates confirming the extensive scope of damage and performed initial mitigation for which the Insured paid $7,089.92. After assessing the damage and the true scope of repairs, the Insured's retained services prepared reports and estimates confirming the extensive scope of damage and performed initial mitigation for which the Insured paid $7,089.92. After assessing the damage and the true scope of repairs, the Insured's retained services prepared reports and estimates confirming the extensive scope of damage and performed initial mitigation for which the Insured paid $7,089.92.

Following the Inspection of the Loss, [name redacted] produced a comprehensive Xactimate repair estimate totaling $22,251.94 (RCV) and $22,040.34 (ACV), that included but was not limited to: repairs to the Bathroom (including linen closet) to restore these areas back to pre-loss condition, as well as the aforementioned incurred costs for emergency mitigation efforts and other line items for general conditions, debris removal and other reasonable and necessary costs. The POL, in the amount of $17,096.74 represented the actual cash value of the claim after deduction of the $500.00 deductible as referenced in the comprehensive [name redacted] Estimate and supporting damages documentation. Notwithstanding, the Insurance Company was still on notice by the Insured via TPC to resolve the coverage dispute by overturning its wrongful denial and issue payment for at least the Actual Cash Value of