I turned in a claim to my former property owner to compensate for losses to my personal property because they did not disclose to me that the chimney was broken and the fireplace was unusable (they actually had all the firestarting equipment in the adjacent cabinet). The house caught fire and burned down. I received a response from their insurance company denying liability and compensation. I feel the property owner is liable for neglecting to tell me not to use the fireplace. Since I've been denied by their insurance company, do I have to add them as a defendant in the small claims court case?
I couldn't afford renter's insurance. Plus, even if I did, and got paid, wouldn't the insurance company go after the property owner to compensate them back?
I should add that the property owner knew the fireplace was unusable, it is documented in an appraisal report issued to them three months before I moved in.
In my claim for compensation, I did list the inventory of items lost, and took off value from it's original cost based on how old it was.
Hi Jr, I'd message you privately if you allowed it. I tried very hard to do this out of court, by filing a claim to them in May, and again in July. The property owner is adamantly opposed to working this out on a personal level and feels others are liable instead of them. There's a lot of finger pointing going on.
I am loathe to go to court but it seems like the only option is to have an unbiased third party "judge" the situation. I have been treated quite poorly by the property owner and their insurance company.
There's also motive/opportunity/evidence that the property owner wanted the house to burn down (it was scheduled to be demolished in a few years) so they could collect insurance money for it and not have to pay for it's deconstruction. But I don't want to go there. Let's just say there's a lot of references to the smoke alarm, and none to the chimney.
by "references" I mean in the lease agreement.
Did I say I left the house unattended? Do you a think that maybe a chimney flaw could cause the house to burn by setting the roof on fire? It couldn't be seen and I was alerted to this by a passerby.
I know his insurance company does not have coverage for my stuff but the property owner was NEGLIGENT by NOT telling me the fireplace could NOT be used. He turned my claim into their insurance company which sent me a denial letter.
Renter's Insurance was $ 30 a month. And again, the insurance investigation would have turned up documentation pointing out that the property owner knew about the condition and didnt disclose it, and try and get the money from them. What's the difference with me doing it?
Answer by timothy p
did you have renters insurance. Always carry this insurance. You wouldn't have to deal with any of this. They aren't liable anyway. Insurance of personal items is usually the responsibility of the tenant.
That being said... Your claim is against the landlord. His insurance is correct in stating they are not responsible. It sounds like you have a pretty good case against him if he knew the fireplace was damaged. If he didn't know then he wasn't negligent and it will be a matter of you not carrying renters insurance. This is required in most areas.
Answer by Jr
Agree with Timothy. Renters insurance cost me $ 200 for the year. (california). Most people just don't want to spend the money.
Why don't you just write up a list of what you lost, the original value of it, and then you must depreciate the value because the stuff is not new, and then submit it to the landlord. At least give the landlord the option of paying you. Be fair with the value of your items.
Add: you know that "appraisal" report you are talking about?...well, it sounds like that was an appraisal prior to them purchasing the property. I'm guessing. If that is the case, you don't really know whether or not they paid someone to fix the fireplace. Maybe they did, and they thought it was repaired. Can't you just talk to them? I'm not big on litigation, if you can get what you want another way.
ADD: (after your additional comments). Why don't you skip doing it yourself and go get some of that free legal advice that is always being talked about on TV commercials. Maybe you can even be compensated for relocation etc.. You are caught in a position of everyone thinking the other person is responsible. So, I would get some free legal advice and sue the landlord. The landlord could always sue their own insurance company for lack of coverage.
Also, people, fireplaces can ignite. That is why fireplaces are inspected when property is purchased/sold. A faulty fireplace is the landlords responsibility, and until you see the landlords insurance policy, you don't really know whether or not this type of thing is covered. I would think that it would be.
Keep trying. I certainly do not think it is your fault. That's for sure.
Answer by mbrcatz
It's pointless to name their insurance company. The insurance company didn't burn the house down or cause the damage. HIS insurance has NO COVERAGE for YOUR stuff.
Your "feelings" are irrelevant. You set the fire in the fireplace, what, you left it unattended?? Otherwise you would have seen it getting out of hand? It had to have been unattended - so that's GROSS negligence on your part.
More to the point, you should be expecting a letter from HIS insurance, requiring you to reimburse them for the damage YOU caused by burning his house down.
Renters insurance costs about $ 150 a year. And no, the owner isn't liable for this fire as far as I can tell - because they didn't SET it - so your renters isn't going to go back to the landlord for reimbursement.
Just because something HAPPENS at a location, doesn't mean the owner is automatically LIABLE for it.
Answer by Caveat Emptor
Your "case" is built on the allegation that the landlord was negligent. You cannot sue his insurer. You must sue him directly.
Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!
Orignal From: I'm preparing a small claims case against my former property owner. Do I need to add their insurance company?
Post a Comment