Carl Bober and Josh Meyer (Hollywood, FL) (Property) obtained a verdict resulting in zero recovery to the Plaintiffs on behalf of their client, Citizens Property Insurance Corporation.
Plaintiffs brought a breach of contract action regarding a residential property insurance claim for damages to their home related to Hurricane Ian. Plaintiffs sought the replacement of their roof as well as payment for interior water damages to their property for a total claimed loss in excess of $108K. After an inspection by an independent adjuster, Citizens denied their claim due to exclusions in the policy of insurance for wear, tear and deterioration to the roof, as well as the lack of a peril created opening at the property. Plaintiffs subsequently filed suit and provided Citizens with the report of an expert engineer who testified at trial that based upon his investigation, the wind pressures experienced at the insured property and the damages he observed during his inspection – including torn and lifted shingles on the Plaintiffs’ roof and leaks to the interior – were clearly caused by the winds experienced during Hurricane Ian. He relied upon the fact that the permit history revealed the Plaintiff’s roof was only 4 years old at the time of the storm and had recently passed inspection by the building department. Plaintiffs’ expert testified that the replacement of the roof, flooring, and matching repairs throughout the property were all needed to bring the home back to its pre-loss condition.
For the defense, our expert engineer testified on behalf of Citizens that there was no wind damage to the Plaintiffs’ property caused by Hurricane Ian, which produced only minimal winds in Broward County, and that the leaks that the homeowners experienced were due to deterioration at the roof/wall interface at the property as well as defective installation. Both our field adjuster and expert located the exact point of entry of the leaks and were able to able to show the jury both the already present deterioration to stucco on the wall intersecting with the Plaintiff’s first floor roof (as well as the lack of proper flashing from pre- and post-loss repair photos) in order to demonstrate why the claimed damages were not from a one-time storm event.
Plaintiff’s claimed $108,502 in damages, not including their additional claim for attorney’s fee and costs.
The jury found that there was no peril created opening to the Plaintiffs’ roof and awarded $2K in roof repairs, which amount was below the policy deductible, resulting in zero recovery to Plaintiffs.