Saturday, January 13th, 2007
Thursday, a jury on awarded $2.5 million in punitive damages to Norman and Genevieve Broussard a couple who sued State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. for denying their claim after Hurricane Katrina. This decision could assist hundreds of other homeowners in their attempts to force insurers to cover billions of dollars in storm damage. U.S. District Judge L.T. Senter’s earlier rulings in other Katrina cases have favored the insurance industry, but this decision goes to the heart of the objection companies have use to refuse to cover billions of dollars in damage from Katrina’s storm surge. After he explained his ruling, Senter ordered a recess to give attorneys time “to get over the shock.” After the jury announced its award, the Broussards left the courthouse arm in arm. “It’s a great day for South Mississippi,” Norman Broussard said.
The Broussards claimed that a tornado during the hurricane destroyed their home. State Farm blamed all the damage on Katrina’s storm surge.
State Farm and other insurers say their homeowner policies are written to cover damage from wind but not from water. That flooding and storm surge are excluded as part of homeowners policy even though those policies were sold as covering Hurricanes, even if hurricane-force winds preceded a storm’s rising water. In fact, after State Farm and other companies writing property insurance in Florida, suffered catastrophic losses after Hurricane Andrew, they dramatically altered the terms of their polices. In addition to increasing deductibles, they divided up the destructive force of a hurricane into two parts. One is wind, which is covered, and second is the water surge, which is not. It is for this reason that immediately after Katrina you heard Insurance companies talking about the “Great Flood of 2005.” Flood insurance is offered on a separate policy. Property coverage can be tricky, since there are often exclusions that might not always seem obvious or intuitive. It is always a good idea to review your coverage with an insurance professional.
The judge ruled that State Farm couldn’t prove that Katrina’s storm surge was responsible for all of the damage to the Broussards’ home. The judge also said the testimony failed to establish how much damage was caused by wind and how much resulted from storm surge.
State Farm spokesman Phil Supple said after the jury’s verdict that the company is likely to appeal the decision. “We are surprised and disappointed by both the judge’s ruling on the coverage issues and the amount awarded by the jury for punitive damages,” he said in a written statement. “We believe the expert testimony supported a different result.”
The Broussards claimed that a tornado during the hurricane destroyed their home. State Farm blamed all the damage on Katrina’s storm surge.
State Farm and other insurers say their homeowner policies are written to cover damage from wind but not from water. That flooding and storm surge are excluded as part of homeowners policy even though those policies were sold as covering Hurricanes, even if hurricane-force winds preceded a storm’s rising water. In fact, after State Farm and other companies writing property insurance in Florida, suffered catastrophic losses after Hurricane Andrew, they dramatically altered the terms of their polices. In addition to increasing deductibles, they divided up the destructive force of a hurricane into two parts. One is wind, which is covered, and second is the water surge, which is not. It is for this reason that immediately after Katrina you heard Insurance companies talking about the “Great Flood of 2005.” Flood insurance is offered on a separate policy. Property coverage can be tricky, since there are often exclusions that might not always seem obvious or intuitive. It is always a good idea to review your coverage with an insurance professional.
The judge ruled that State Farm couldn’t prove that Katrina’s storm surge was responsible for all of the damage to the Broussards’ home. The judge also said the testimony failed to establish how much damage was caused by wind and how much resulted from storm surge.
State Farm spokesman Phil Supple said after the jury’s verdict that the company is likely to appeal the decision. “We are surprised and disappointed by both the judge’s ruling on the coverage issues and the amount awarded by the jury for punitive damages,” he said in a written statement. “We believe the expert testimony supported a different result.”
Property coverage can be tricky, since there are often exclusions that might not always seem obvious or intuitive. It is always a good idea to review your coverage with an insurance professional.
No comments:
Post a Comment