Professional Home Inspections

Policyholder:? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? [redacted] Claim Number:? ? ? ? ? ? ? [redacted] Policy Number:? ? ? ? ? ? ? [redacted] Date of Loss:? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? June 6, 2017? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Type of Loss:? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Lightning ? ? To Whom it May Concern: ? This letter will serve as our formal response to the above referenced matter.? ? This loss was reported to us by the insured on June 6, as a lightning claim to the residence affecting the electrical system, appliances and vehicles occurring that day.? ? We spoke to the insured on June 6, 2017.? The insured advised that a lightning strike had either hit close to the home or hit his truck antenna.? He stated that the antenna was not working and that there were burn marks visible on the truckHe also reported that his wife’s car did not work eitherThe insured also reported three televisions, their satellite receivers, lights, outlets and the irrigation system were not working properlyMr [redacted] advised that he would provide us with a comprehensive list of his damaged items.? The coverage exclusions for the vehicles were immediately explained to the insured.? We approved additional living expenses and requested that he keep all of his receiptsWe further advised the insured to contact an electrician to verify the cause and extent of his damage ? Given the nature and extent of the damages we felt an inspection of the property was warranted.? We assigned the inspection to [redacted] ? to assist in determining the cause and extent of the damages ? We sent a lightning affidavit/letter to the insured on June 9, requesting that he have the affidavit completed by a technician who could attest to the fact that the items claimed were damaged by lightning ? [redacted] inspected the property on June 10, ? We received a call from the [redacted] adjuster on June 19, prior to receiving their reportThe [redacted] adjuster advised that at the time of the inspection the insured had kept requesting that he delete his photos.? The insured stated that he did not want photos takenThe [redacted] adjuster reported that several of the items claimed by the insured would need diagnostic reports to support the claim ? We received the report from [redacted] on June 20, ? We received a voice message from the insured on June 21, and returned the call the same dayThe insured expressed frustration and requested a status update and the [redacted] estimate of the damagesWe advised the insured that we were still waiting for the diagnostic reports from his electrician to confirm the lightning strike and damages and whether the damages were repairableWe advised the insured of his $2,deductible during the conversation ? We spoke to the insured on June 27, to provide him with our address to send correspondence ? We received a letter from the insured on June 29, containing a proposal from [redacted] to diagnose the cause of loss and damagesThe proposal for the diagnosis was $19,using their hourly rate which would be two weeks at $per hour or $17,if using the square foot method of square feet at $per square feet ? Due to what we felt was an excessive inspection and diagnosis fee, we decided to retain the service of an electrical engineer with [redacted] ? to complete a site inspection to evaluate the dwelling and contents for lightning damage and also provide us with a repair cost protocolWe made the assignment to [redacted] on June 29, and called the insured to advise him of our action plan moving forwardThe insured expressed frustration that we would not pay the diagnosis fee for his electrician ? On July 7, we were copied on an email from [redacted] to the insured advising him that they had been unable to reach him by phone and asking him to call them to set up an inspection ? On July 11, we were copied on another email from [redacted] to the insured advising him that they had been unable to reach him by phone and asking him to call them to set up an inspection.? We then called the insured’s agent to confirm his contact information.? We were eventually able to speak with the insured.? He was very angry.? He stated that his well pump was still not replaced and that all his grass and plants were dying.? He advised that he had not seen an engineerWe explained that the engineer’s phone calls to reach him have been unsuccessful and that their voicemails left for him had not been returned nor had there been any response to any of the emails sent by the engineer.? We advised the insured that we had been attempting to contact him to schedule the inspection, and that it had been his lack of contact and cooperation which had delayed this processThe insured stated that he felt it was not his fault, and that he is upset we had to send an engineer and would not just pay the claim based on what he asked for.? We explained again the process and the documentation that was needed.? The insured then expressed that it was his opinion that the [redacted] adjuster should have been able to diagnose and estimate all the issues and that the entire process should have taken no longer than 3-days from the date of the inspection.? We explained why this was not a reasonable expectation and that he needed to contact the engineer to schedule an appointment for an inspectionMr [redacted] stated he would contact [redacted] as requested and schedule an inspection, but reiterated that he felt this was ridiculous.? ? On July 17, we spoke to Mr***The insured was inquiring as to the status of his additional living expense claimHe advised that his typical expenses for groceries and dining out were $per weekWe advised him that the engineer inspection was scheduled for the following morning and we would be in a better position to discuss his claim after that ? On July 19, we spoke with the engineerHe advised that he would be preparing a report for usHe advised that the insured had an electrician present at the time of his inspectionThe engineer advised that there was some lightning damage present but that the lightning damage was not as extensive as had been reportedHe advised that all the televisions were functionalHe further advised that the dryer was working and that although a bulb in the dryer was not working it was not lightning relatedThe damage to the oven was still questionable and he was going to investigate further as there were temperature fluctuations but was unsure if this was due to lightningIn addition, he felt most of the appliances were repairable and did not require replacementAlso noted was an active water leak from the ceiling in the kitchen with buckets catching the waterThe engineer stated that this was the result of the HVAC pan overflowing and was unrelated to the lightning damage and that the insured understood that this was a separate lossHe advised that a detailed report would be submitted with his final determinations ? We spoke with the insured on July 22, and advised that we had still not received the engineers report ? We will continue to work with Mr [redacted] to resolve his claim.? We hope our actions and efforts satisfactorily address your concerns.? If additional information is needed, please feel free to contact our office.? ? Sincerely, ? [redacted] Vice President, Marketing