On September 16, 2010, an outdoor sprinkler head burst on the east side exterior wall shooting water through the soffit into the interior of the dwelling guest bedroom, bathroom, baby room, kitchen, laundry room and garage causing direct physical damage to the drywall, carpet, carpet padding, baseboards, doors and door frames, cabinets and many other fixtures located throughout the affected areas.  

Following the loss, the insured immediately contacted a water extraction company to dry out their home and along with the help of her husband, attempted to mitigate the damage as best they could.  As these damages encompassed only the visible damages, there was still an extreme concern relating to the extent of the damages, which have yet to be uncovered.  Nonetheless, the homeowner paid the water extraction company out of their own pocket for their mitigation services and reported the claim to their insurance company.  

After a period of delay in responding, the insurance company assigned an independent adjusting company to inspect and estimate the loss and damage.  On November 13, 2010, two months post-loss, the insurance company sent their insured a correspondence letter along with a damage estimate accounting for minimal repairs (which also failed to allow for Overhead or Profit) and a Proof of Loss form, which was already filled out by the insurance company.  The letter stated that the Proof Of Loss form needed to be signed and returned before any drafts or payments were to be released.  This was very concerning to the insured as it was very clear that the insurance company was attempting to force them to sign a document limiting their recovery by agreeing on a Sworn Statement Proof of Loss form that their loss was only $7,270.54.  When the insured informed their insurance company in writing that they did not agree with the estimated damage amount they were ignored for months.  They also never received a payment to begin any type of repairs.  

The insured was also growing increasingly concerned about the presence of mold, as she was pregnant.  To eliminate the potential health hazards to her unborn child, the homeowner decided to move the baby’s room to the other side of the house to an area that was unaffected until proper testing could be completed. 

In February of 2011 after five (5) months of claim delay and no payment the insured decided to hire public adjuster, Rick Tutwiler upon the recommendation of a friend who just so happened to be an insurance adjuster.  After a brief review of the file and claim handling method conducted by the insurance company, Mr. Tutwiler recommended the insured file a Civil Remedy Notice using a local law firm, which quickly prompted the $7,270.54 advance payment for the undisputed amount on March 23, 2011, seven (7) months after the date of loss.

Shortly thereafter, Mr. Tutwiler coordinated multiple inspections at the residence using various experts to test for mold as well as obtain professional opinions regarding the method and cost of repair and then prepared a claim package and submitted it to the insurance company.  However the insurance company continued their delay in readjusting this claim, which prompted Mr. Tutwiler to invoke the appraisal provision in the policy to resolve the outstanding differences.

In appraisal, Mr. Tutwiler was able to successfully negotiate a total of $33,422.60 on behalf of the insured, which represented an additional $26,152.06 above what the insurance company originally offered in their damage estimate.

Ten (10) months post-loss and the insured was finally able to restore their home back to its original condition and no more worries of mold as a healthy newborn was born and fast asleep in her new room.

Insured: “Thank you Rick for all your help!”