September 11, 2015*** *** ***
*** * *** ***
*** ** ***RE: Company: Nautilus Insurance CompanyClaim Number: ***Insured: *** *** ***Policy Number: ***Date of Loss: 05/14/2015Policy Period: 01/20/to 01/20/2016Loss Location: *** ** *** ***
**Revdex.com Complaint ID: ***Dear Dispute Resolution Consultant:We are in receipt of the Revdex.com complaint lodged against Nautilus Insurance Company by*** ***The complaint alleges that *** *** has not heard anything regarding his claim for twomonths and that Nautilus Insurance Company has not paid his claim for damages.*** with *** *** reported a claim to us on June 18, for water damage thatoccurred on May 14, The claim was assigned to me on June 18, I contacted *** *** onJune 18, *** *** advised that a plumbing pipe had burst in the building resulting in waterdamage to the buildingI reviewed *** ***’s policy and advised *** *** that the water damagewas not a covered cause of loss under his policy of insurance with Nautilus Insurance CompanyIprepared a disclaimer of coverage letter to the insured and the letter was mailed certified and regular mailon June 18, The certified letter was delivered and signed for on June 22, The claim wasclosed at this time.On July 8, 2015, I was contacted by the insured’s agentThe agent advised that *** *** and hiscontractor advised the damages were due to a sinkholeThe claim was reopened and assigned to anindependent adjuster to inspect the damagesThe independent adjuster inspected the property on July 13,with *** ***’s contractor; *** *** *** advised that the pipe break was due toa sinkholeAt the time of the inspection, the pipe had been repaired and there was no evidence of asinkhole as the area in question had been repaired and backfilledThe contractor had installed a newcatch basin in the back yardThe original catch basin had been a hole covered with two pieces of wood.The independent adjuster opined that the broken water pipe was due to a failed catch basin, not asinkhole.*** *** LLC***September 11, 2015Page 2On July 23, 2015, I advised the independent adjuster to engage the services of an engineer todetermine if a sinkhole was present on the property and if the sinkhole was the cause of the pipe breakand the ensuing water damage to the building.The engineer advised that there was water infiltration into the basement of the buildingThe waterinfiltration was caused by a water backupThe water infiltration was not caused by a water supply line.There was reported soil settlement in the front yard that was repaired prior to the inspectionTheengineer is not aware of any photographs of the soil settlement in the front yardA brick catch basin inthe rear yard was deteriorated and falling apartThe catch basin was subsequently repaired.The engineer further opined that the water damage was caused by a water backup of a sewer lineThebackup of the sewer line was caused by a fracture or blockage of the sewer lineThis may have beenfrom the deteriorated catch basin in the rear yardBased on the description of the soil settlement, it ispossible that there was a sewer line breakage in the front yard that caused blockage and the subsequentsoil settlementHowever, the photographs of the soil settlement and contractor repair proposals wouldneed to be provided to further comment on thisThere is no evidence provided to date that a sinkholecaused the events that led to the water infiltration into the subject building.As of the date of this letter, any photographs from the contractor and the contractor’s repair proposal havebeen provided to the engineer and we await the engineer’s final report.If you have questions regarding this matter, please call me at *** ext***Sincerely,Nautilus Insurance Company*** ***Property SpecialistDirect Fax: ***Email: ***cc: *** * * *** *** *** *** ***
September 11, 2015*** *** ***
*** * *** ***
*** ** ***RE: Company: Nautilus Insurance CompanyClaim Number: ***Insured: *** *** ***Policy Number: ***Date of Loss: 05/14/2015Policy Period: 01/20/to 01/20/2016Loss Location: *** ** *** ***
**Revdex.com Complaint ID: ***Dear Dispute Resolution Consultant:We are in receipt of the Revdex.com complaint lodged against Nautilus Insurance Company by*** ***The complaint alleges that *** *** has not heard anything regarding his claim for twomonths and that Nautilus Insurance Company has not paid his claim for damages.*** with *** *** reported a claim to us on June 18, for water damage thatoccurred on May 14, The claim was assigned to me on June 18, I contacted *** *** onJune 18, *** *** advised that a plumbing pipe had burst in the building resulting in waterdamage to the buildingI reviewed *** ***’s policy and advised *** *** that the water damagewas not a covered cause of loss under his policy of insurance with Nautilus Insurance CompanyIprepared a disclaimer of coverage letter to the insured and the letter was mailed certified and regular mailon June 18, The certified letter was delivered and signed for on June 22, The claim wasclosed at this time.On July 8, 2015, I was contacted by the insured’s agentThe agent advised that *** *** and hiscontractor advised the damages were due to a sinkholeThe claim was reopened and assigned to anindependent adjuster to inspect the damagesThe independent adjuster inspected the property on July 13,with *** ***’s contractor; *** *** *** advised that the pipe break was due toa sinkholeAt the time of the inspection, the pipe had been repaired and there was no evidence of asinkhole as the area in question had been repaired and backfilledThe contractor had installed a newcatch basin in the back yardThe original catch basin had been a hole covered with two pieces of wood.The independent adjuster opined that the broken water pipe was due to a failed catch basin, not asinkhole.*** *** LLC***September 11, 2015Page 2On July 23, 2015, I advised the independent adjuster to engage the services of an engineer todetermine if a sinkhole was present on the property and if the sinkhole was the cause of the pipe breakand the ensuing water damage to the building.The engineer advised that there was water infiltration into the basement of the buildingThe waterinfiltration was caused by a water backupThe water infiltration was not caused by a water supply line.There was reported soil settlement in the front yard that was repaired prior to the inspectionTheengineer is not aware of any photographs of the soil settlement in the front yardA brick catch basin inthe rear yard was deteriorated and falling apartThe catch basin was subsequently repaired.The engineer further opined that the water damage was caused by a water backup of a sewer lineThebackup of the sewer line was caused by a fracture or blockage of the sewer lineThis may have beenfrom the deteriorated catch basin in the rear yardBased on the description of the soil settlement, it ispossible that there was a sewer line breakage in the front yard that caused blockage and the subsequentsoil settlementHowever, the photographs of the soil settlement and contractor repair proposals wouldneed to be provided to further comment on thisThere is no evidence provided to date that a sinkholecaused the events that led to the water infiltration into the subject building.As of the date of this letter, any photographs from the contractor and the contractor’s repair proposal havebeen provided to the engineer and we await the engineer’s final report.If you have questions regarding this matter, please call me at *** ext***Sincerely,Nautilus Insurance Company*** ***Property SpecialistDirect Fax: ***Email: ***cc: *** * * *** *** *** *** ***