Name: Raizner Slania LLP
Address: 2402 Dunlavy St Suite 300, Houston, TX, 77006, US
Telephone: 844-554-9099
Price range: Let Our Team Help You

Hotels and motels offer temporary shelter for groups and individuals traveling or simply needing a place to stay. While these properties offer a safe haven for fatigued travelers, they are not immune from unexpected disasters. Severe weather, natural disaster events, and even vandalism or theft can occur at nearly any time. While the owner’s commercial property insurance policy can be incredibly beneficial in these situations, filing a claim and receiving the proper compensation is not always easy. In fact, in some circumstances, it may be necessary for a commercial property owner to take legal action and file a lawsuit against their insurer to recover what they are rightfully owed under the terms of their commercial insurance policy.

In the event an insurance carrier acts in bad faith and wrongfully denies, delays, or underpays a valid commercial property damage claim, the consequences can be dire and result in a loss of income for the business. Damage to hotels, resorts, and motels can also be incredibly costly, particularly if high-risk events cause damage. Owners may need to shut down part or all of the business while the full extent of the damage is reviewed and repaired. Insurance companies are all too familiar with the stress this puts on business owners, however, their focus is on their financial interests, not on those of the insured. When this happens, it is often in the best interest of a commercial policyholder to obtain legal counsel from an experienced commercial property damage claims attorney.

At Raizner Slania, our seasoned attorneys have represented a variety of hotel and motel owners in Texas and across the nation in complex insurance cases. Our vast experience in handling the unique issues of the hospitality industry allows us to fight for the rights hotel and motel owners have under their insurance policies.

Some of the notable insurance coverage lawsuits our law firm has filed on behalf of hotel and motel owners include the following cases:

Hail Damage Lawsuit Against Zurich American Insurance Company
Insurance Lawsuit Against Capacity Insurance Company
Insurance Lawsuit Against Truck Insurance Exchange
Hail Damage Lawsuit Against Liberty Mutual Insurance Europe, Ltd. and Engle Martin & Associates
Bad Faith Insurance Lawsuit Against Scottsdale Insurance Company
Windstorm Lawsuit Against Underwriters at Lloyd’s London and Engle Martin & Associates
Hurricane Harvey Lawsuit Against Selective Insurance Company of the Southeast
Insurance Lawsuit Against Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC, Brezina Claims, et al.
Hurricane Harvey Insurance Lawsuit Against Arch Specialty Insurance Company
Wind and Hail Damage Lawsuit Against Liberty Mutual and Engle Martin & Associates, Inc.
Hurricane Harvey Damage Lawsuit Against AmGuard Insurance Company
Hurricane Hanna Damage Lawsuit Against Mt. Hawley Insurance Company, et al.
Hurricane Harvey Damage Lawsuit Against Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, et al.
Hurricane Harvey Damage Lawsuit Against Greenhill Group LLC, et al.
Hurricane Harvey Damage Lawsuit Against Palomar Specialty Insurance Company
Hail Damage Lawsuit Against United Specialty Insurance Company, et al.
Hurricane Harvey Bad Faith Insurance Lawsuit Against Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London
Bad Faith Insurance Lawsuit Against AmRisc, LLC, et al.
Hurricane Harvey Bad Faith Insurance Lawsuit Against Rockhill Insurance Company
Hurricane Harvey Insurance Lawsuit Against Palomar Specialty Insurance Company
Wind and Rainstorm Damage Lawsuit Against The Cincinnati Indemnity Company
Hurricane Harvey Insurance Lawsuit Against Palomar Specialty Insurance Company
Hail Damage Lawsuit Against Arch Specialty Insurance Company
Windstorm Damage Lawsuit Against Everest Indemnity Insurance Company and Engle Martin
Insurance Lawsuit Against GuideOne National Insurance Claims, et al.

Hail Damage Lawsuit on Behalf of an Arlington, Texas Hotel Owner Against Zurich American Insurance Company

In May 2016, our Texas hotel owner client discovered extensive hail damage to the property from a hail storm that swept through Arlington. Substantial portions of the commercial property’s roof, windows, and interiors sustained damage. The plaintiff promptly filed a claim with Zurich, alerting them to the extensive damages and asking that the cost of repairs be covered pursuant to the policy.

Zurich’s retained adjuster performed a cursory investigation of the property in April 2017 and prepared an estimate for payment to the plaintiff. The adjuster documented a minimal amount of damage, and then issued an underpayment based on its own faulty estimates. In part, due to the significant underpayment, in July 2017, the plaintiff engaged a public adjuster to represent its interests. It was only after the plaintiff notified Zurich that it had hired a public adjuster that Zurich retained also a third-party company to perform an investigation of the property.

The third-party determined the damages were the result of “long-term deterioration of the seals,” and recommended an additional, sub-standard payment. Zurich’s claims-handling process omitted a wealth of facts, physical evidence, obvious damages, and meteorological data supporting the plaintiff’s claim.

Insurance Lawsuit on Behalf of Donley County Motel Owners Against Capacity Insurance Company

On December 26, 2018, a wind and hailstorm struck the plaintiffs’ property, resulting in significant damage to the structure, including damage to sizeable portions of the property’s roof. As a result, there was also substantial damage to the interior and exterior of the buildings and signage. Immediately after the storm, the plaintiffs filed an insurance claim with their carrier.

The insurance carrier—Capacity—assigned Patrick Meegan as the lead adjuster to handle the claim. Meegan inspected the property in March of 2020, but was unqualified and incapable of adequately assessing the damages to this type of commercial property. Capacity subsequently engaged Rimkus Consulting Group, Inc. to perform an inspection of the property. Capacity chose Rimkus – an engineering consulting company consistently retained by insurance carriers – to generate a report it could use to deny or severely underpay the claim.

To date, the carrier has failed to issue the full payment owed under the policy covering plaintiffs’ property and instead authorized continued delays and underpayments. Due to Capacity’s outcome-oriented, inadequate, and haphazard investigation, the carrier has refused to pay for covered damages under the policy.

Insurance Lawsuit Against Truck Insurance Exchange

On June 23, 2018, a vehicle traveling at a high rate of speed drove into the Plaintiff’s motel, causing significant damage to the building as well as the motel’s inventory and personal property. Furthermore, the crash resulted in a significant loss of business as the motel was forced to close for eight months. Subsequently, Plaintiff filed a claim with Truck Insurance Exchange regarding the extensive damages.

Truck Insurance Exchange wrongfully underpaid Plaintiff’s claim by omitting important facts and physical evidence that supported Plaintiff’s claim and extensive losses. Despite partial payment, the Plaintiff continues to wait for full payment covering lost business personal property and lost business income. The adjuster evaluating the damage, made unreasonable adjustments when inspecting the lost business personal property and business income portions of the claim, which resulted in Truck Insurance Exchange’s ignorance of crucial facts and refusal to fully accept liability.

Hail Damage Lawsuit on Behalf of a Harris County Hotel Owner Against Liberty Mutual Insurance Europe, Ltd. and Engle Martin & Associates

On April 19, 2015, a severe hailstorm swept through Harris County and caused substantial damage to the plaintiff’s property. In addition to the hailstorm, that same week there were three days of high winds that also impacted the property. As a result, the roof, HVAC, stucco, windows, exterior, and interior of the property were damaged. Immediately upon discovering the damage, the plaintiff filed an insurance claim with Liberty Mutual to cover the cost of repairs to the property. Liberty Mutual assigned adjusters, consultants, and agents that were inadequate and improperly trained.

The adjusting firm and its internal adjuster conducted an unreasonable and inadequate investigation and denied any wind, hail, and water damage to the roof, HVAC, stucco, windows, exterior, and interior. He also grossly undervalued what damage he did accept. Specifically, the internal adjuster ignored facts supporting the plaintiff’s assertions of covered wind, hail, and water damages in April 2015 and instead only accepted facts that would support the pre-determined denial of the property damage. Because of the internal adjuster’s haphazard investigation, no payments have been issued under the policy. Liberty Mutual and Engle Martin wrongfully denied the insurance claim and delayed the plaintiff’s claim for property repairs. This caused the plaintiff significant economic impact, worry, distress, and continuing economic and physical damage.

Bad Faith Insurance Lawsuit Against Scottsdale Insurance Company

On January 8, 2016, a severe wind and hail storm swept through Harris County, causing significant damage to the roof, interior, and exterior of the plaintiff’s hotel property. Immediately upon discovering the damage, the plaintiff filed an insurance claim with Scottsdale and asked the cost of repairs be covered pursuant to the policy. In response to the claim, Scottsdale assigned adjusters, consultants, and agents to plaintiff’s file that were inadequate and improperly trained and that would violate standard insurance practices when directed to do so by Scottsdale.

Scottsdale represented to the plaintiff that certain damages were not covered under the policy, when in fact they were; and the insurer continued to deny timely payment to cover the cost of the damages. Because of this, the plaintiff was forced to hire their own consultant to independently evaluate the damages to the property.

Windstorm Lawsuit Against Underwriters at Lloyd’s London and Engle Martin & Associates

On March 25^th and 26^th, 2016, a windstorm swept through Harris County, causing substantial damage to the roof, windows, exteriors, and interiors of the plaintiff’s property. After the storm, the plaintiff immediately filed an insurance claim to cover the damages to the property. In response to the claim, Lloyd’s assigned representatives, adjusters, consultants, and agents to the plaintiff’s claim that were inadequately and improperly trained. Specifically, Lloyd’s assigned the claim to Engle Martin, who in turn assigned it to an employee who was not equipped to handle this type of claim.

As a result of the employee’s haphazard inspection, misrepresentations, and inadequate investigation, Lloyd’s denied the plaintiff’s claim for wind damages by sending an engineering report stating there was no damage.

Hurricane Harvey Lawsuit Against Selective Insurance Company of the Southeast

On August 25, 2017, Hurricane Harvey came ashore in Texas and brought hurricane force winds and unprecedented amounts of rainfall. The plaintiff’s property was inundated with floodwaters as a result of Hurricane Harvey. The contaminated floodwaters stood for several days, causing extensive damage to the property.

The plaintiff informed Selective Insurance of the flood insurance losses, and in response Selective Insurance hired and sent an adjuster to the property to inspect the damages. Selective Insurance and its adjuster prepared damage estimates and Proofs of Loss, but they chose not to comply with the provisions and requirements of the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s rules, regulations, guidance, and Adjuster Claims Manual. Ultimately, the plaintiff realized numerous flood damaged items had been omitted and/or significantly underpaid by Selective Insurance.

Insurance Lawsuit Against Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC, Brezina Claims

On April 4, 2012, there was a severe wind and hail storm which caused serious damage to the hotel property, including the roof, windows, HVAC, exterior and interior spaces, including ceilings and furnishings. Right after the storm, our client filed the claim pursuant to its insurance policy with Great Lakes Reinsurance. There was another storm on December 25, 2012, less than two weeks after the hotel owner signed a renewal for their insurance policy, which resulted in further damage to the roof, HVAC, windows, and more. The insured immediately filed a second claim with Great Lakes for that damage.

Great Lakes, assigned Brezina Claims to handle the insurance adjustment, and they, in turn assigned an individual adjuster. The insured contends that no competent consultants or adjusters were assigned to objectively evaluate the damage. The only adjuster Brezina did assign showed up only once, on August 13, 2012, to inspect the property; however, he prepared no damage estimates. Subsequently, Brezina and Rayburn told Great Lakes that there was no hail damage to the property and the claim was denied.

When the second storm hit on December 25, 2012, the second claim was made by the hotel owner, after which Brezina and its adjuster “grossly underestimated” the extent and value of the property damage from that storm. The situation was so bad that our client hired its own consultants and adjusters to prepare its own estimates, all of which Great Lakes ignored. The complaint alleges that Great Lakes, Brezina, and the individual adjuster wrongfully denied and underpaid our client’s’ claims for property repairs under the policy and that the adjuster wrongly misrepresented that some damages and losses were not covered under the policies when they were. All three parties delayed the claims process and Great Lakes refused to issue further payments under the policy, which our client claims has caused them serious financial harm.

Hurricane Harvey Insurance Lawsuit on Behalf of a Katy, Texas Motel Owner Against Arch Specialty Insurance Company

On August 25, 2017, one of the most devastating storms in United States history, Hurricane Harvey, came ashore as a Category 4 hurricane. Hurricane Harvey had wind speeds up to 150 miles per hour. As a result of these extreme winds, Harvey caused significant damage to the plaintiff’s motel. Sizable portions of the property’s roof were compromised by wind, which caused further damage to the interiors, including the windows, drywall, insulation, and flooring.

Immediately upon discovering the damage, the plaintiff filed an insurance claim with Arch and asked that the cost of repairs be covered pursuant to the policy. Arch utilized a preferred vendor to inspect the property on September 7, 2017. Arch denied the claim on December 10, 2017. According to the preferred the vendor for Arch, the claim was denied on the basis that “the roof system and building envelope did not sustain wind damage, which would have allowed water to enter. Further, the water entry is a direct result of water entering in the building through already present deficiencies in the roof and envelope systems.” To date, Arch has refused to pay for the property damage. As a result of Arch’s unreasonable denial, the plaintiff has suffered extreme economic hardship.

Wind and Hail Damage Lawsuit Against Liberty Mutual and Engle Martin & Associates, Inc.

On October 4, 2104, which caused serious damage to the hotel, including the roofs, HVAC, exteriors, interiors, and more. Right after the storm, our client filed a claim under its policy with Liberty Mutual Insurance. Liberty assigned Engle, Martin & Associates, Inc., a Georgia company, to handle the insurance adjustment, and they, in turn assigned an individual adjuster. Our client alleges that the adjuster failed to perform a thorough investigation of the claim, performed substandard inspections of the property, and prepared a damage estimate that grossly undervalued the destruction of the property. The adjuster also said that the damages were not in fact caused by the hailstorm and windstorm, but instead resulted from prior conditions and wear and tear.

Plaintiff was not fully paid under the insurance policy; therefore, it hired its own consultant to independently evaluate the property damage. Plaintiff’s consultant identified substantial damage far beyond that the adjuster estimated. Liberty Mutual still refused to pay. This has caused additional damages to the property, including but not limited to further interior problems and roof damage.

Hurricane Harvey Damage Lawsuit on Behalf of a New Braunfels Hotel Owner Against AmGuard Insurance Company

On August 25, 2017, Hurricane Harvey came ashore along the Texas coast and traveled inland toward the Hill Country. Harvey brought extreme winds and rain that caused significant damage to the plaintiff’s property. Sizable portions of the roof and exterior were compromised by wind, and as a result, there was also substantial interior damage caused by the rainfall. AmGuard’s claims-handling process resulted in a wrongful refusal to pay and omitted a wealth of facts, physical evidence, obvious wind damages, and meteorological data supporting the plaintiff’s claim. AmGuard unreasonably pinned the losses on anything but the wind, an action designed to save the company millions of dollars in damages to the property and the business.

Nineteen months after the Hurricane Harvey winds severely damaged this property, based on inadequate investigation, wrongful delays, and refusals to fully pay for reasonably clear damages, AmGuard has not issued a full payment. To this day, due to AmGuard’s outcome-oriented, inadequate, and haphazard investigation, AmGuard has refused to pay for covered damages under the policy.

Hurricane Hanna Damage Lawsuit Against Mt. Hawley Insurance Company and RenaissanceRe Syndicate 1485 Lloyd’s

On or around July 25-26, 2020, Hurricane Hanna’s extreme winds and rain hit Nueces County, Texas. The property was substantially damaged as a result. Sizeable portions of the property’s roof and insulation were compromised by wind, resulting in interior damage to ceilings, windows, and the HVAC system. The Carriers claims-handling process resulted in a wrongful denial that omitted a wealth of facts, physical evidence, obvious wind damage, and meteorological data from Hurricane Hanna that supports the Plaintiff’s claim. The Carriers unreasonably pinned the loss on anything but the wind – an action designed to save the Carriers hundreds of thousands of dollars in claims payments to the policyholder.

Despite clear evidence of covered damage, the Carriers engaged in and ratified this improper claim conduct and ultimately declined to issue a full payment. To this day, due to the Carriers outcome-oriented, inadequate, and haphazard investigation, the Defendants have refused to fully pay for the covered damages under the policy.

Hurricane Harvey Damage Lawsuit Against Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London and York Risk Services Group

On or about August 25, 2017, Hurricane Harvey made landfall on the Texas coast in San Patricio County and Aransas County as a Category 4 hurricane. As a result of Harvey’s extreme winds and rain when it hit the Texas Coast in August, the subject property was substantially damaged. Sizeable portions of the roofs were compromised by wind. As a result, there was also major damage to the interior, as the roof, sliding glass doors, and elevator were substantially damaged by the storm. Immediately after the storm, the plaintiffs filed an insurance claim with Lloyd’s, alerting them to the substantial damages.

Lloyd’s subsequently assigned Charles Bertschi of York, as lead adjuster to handle the claim. Mr. Bertschi assigned Michael Wilson with Madsen, Kneppers & Associates (MKA) to inspect the property. Mr. Bertschi and Mr. Wilson were unqualified and incapable of adequately assessing the damages to this type of commercial property and were the source of many delays throughout the claim process. Despite clear evidence of covered replacement cost damages, Lloyd’s unreasonably blamed the loss on causes other than wind in an effort to avoid contractual responsibilities and to save money. Lloyd’s failed to issue the full payment owed under its insurance policy and instead authorized continued delays and underpayments. To this day, due to Lloyd’s outcome-oriented, inadequate, and haphazard investigation, they have refused to pay for covered damages under the policy.

Hurricane Harvey Damage Lawsuit on Behalf of a Padre Island, Texas Hotel Owner Against Greenhill Group LLC, First Specialty Insurance Corporation, Evanston Insurance Company, and Scottsdale Insurance Company

On August 25, 2017, made landfall on the Texas coast in San Patricio County and Aransas County as a Category 4 hurricane. As a result of Harvey’s extreme winds and rain when it hit Nueces County and specifically the property, the hotel suffered substantial damage. Sizeable portions of the property’s roof were compromised by wind, which in turn caused damage to the interior of the property, electrical components, ceilings, flooring, and HVAC.

Immediately upon discovering the damage, the plaintiff filed insurance claims with the carriers. As the primary insurer on the property, First Specialty took the lead during the claims handling process; however, its claims-handling process resulted in wrongful denials and gross underpayments that omitted a wealth of facts, physical evidence, obvious wind damages, and meteorological data from Hurricane Harvey supporting the plaintiff’s claim. First Specialty unreasonably pinned the loss on anything but the wind, an action designed to save the insurance company and the other carriers millions of dollars in damages to the property and the business.

Hurricane Harvey Damage Lawsuit on Behalf of a Portland, Texas Hotel Owner Against Palomar Specialty Insurance Company

On August 25, 2017, Hurricane Harvey made landfall on the Texas coast as a Category 4 hurricane. As a result of Harvey’s extreme winds and rain when it hit Portland, Texas and specifically the subject property, the hotel was substantially damaged. Sizeable portions of its roof were compromised by wind, which caused additional damage to the interior, including damaged ceilings, walls, and flooring. Immediately upon discovering the damage, the plaintiff filed an insurance claim with Palomar and asked that the cost of repairs be covered pursuant to the policy.

In response, Palomar assigned the claim to an internal adjuster that was unqualified and incapable of adequately assessing the damages to the property. After utilizing a preferred vendor to inspect the property in September, Palomar and the adjuster continued to delay claim resolution and ignored the insured’s requests for updates. The plaintiff continued to press Palomar for updates – or any estimate of damages after their inspection – but they declined and ignored the requests. To this day, due to Palomar’s outcome-oriented, inadequate, and haphazard investigation, Palomar has refused to fully pay for the damages covered under the policy.

Hail Damage Lawsuit Against United Specialty Insurance Company, Strata Claims Management, LLC, and Engle Martin & Associates, LLC

On April 25, 2017, a hail storm swept through Dallas, Texas. The hail storm caused severe damage to the property, including damage to the roof, HVAC system, exterior, and interior of the property. Immediately upon discovering the damage, the plaintiff filed an insurance claim with United Specialty alerting them to the damage. In response to the catastrophe claim, United Specialty assigned adjusters, consultants, and agents to the plaintiff’s file that were inadequate and improperly trained.

United Specialty, with ultimate decision-making authority and acting on its own accord and through its agents Strata, Engle Martin, and their employees, failed to conform to proper claim settlement practices in Texas, failed to properly supervise its designated representatives, and unreasonably denied and delayed full and fair claim payment. Unfortunately, the defendants have delayed payment for the plaintiff’s necessary and covered property repairs under the insurance policy. Given the repeated delays of payment, the plaintiff has been subjected to significant economic impact, worry, distress, and continuing economic and physical damage.

Hurricane Harvey Bad Faith Insurance Lawsuit Against Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London

On August 25, 2017, Hurricane Harvey came ashore as a Category 4 hurricane, inflicting billions of dollars in damages to private and public property. As a result of Harvey’s extreme winds and rain when it hit Bay City and Matagorda County, the plaintiff’s motel property was substantially damaged. Sizeable portions of the property’s roof were compromised by wind, which caused significant damage to the ceilings, walls, and flooring.

Because Lloyd’s did not have a single employee in Texas at the time, the claim was assigned to a third-party administrator. Under Texas law, insurers have a “non-delegable duty” to responsibly handle claims, but Lloyd’s blatantly ignored this duty. The third-party administrator’s adjustment of the claim was disorganized, rife with delays, and left many of the insured’s questions unanswered. Months after inspections of the property, Lloyd’s found “damages found to the property do not exceed your policy deductible,” in an effort to avoid contractual responsibilities and to save significant sums of money at the expense of the plaintiff.

Bad Faith Insurance Lawsuit Against AmRisc, LLC, Certain Underwriters of Lloyd’s, London, Indian Harbor Insurance Company, QBE Specialty Insurance Company, Steadfast Insurance Company, General Security Indemnity Company of Arizona, United Specialty Insurance Company, Lexington Insurance Company, Princeton Excess and Surplus Lines Company, International Insurance Company of Hannover PLC, and Vericlaim, Inc.

On March 25, 2016, a windstorm swept through Nueces County causing substantial damage to the exterior, windows, and interior of the property. Upon discovering the damage, the plaintiff filed an insurance claim under the policy with the carriers. The plaintiff asked that the cost of repairs be covered pursuant to the policy. The claim was assigned to AmRisc, which in turn assigned the claim to Vericlaim as a third party adjusting firm.

Vericlaim assigned the claim to an internal adjuster who was given decision-making authority over the claim. Verclaim and its internal adjuster conducted an unreasonable and inadequate investigation and denied any wind and water damage to the windows, exterior, or interior of the property. The carriers relied on Vericlaim and its internal adjuster’s incomplete investigation to make coverage decisions under the policy and determine what amounts, if any, to pay on the claim. The plaintiff was forced to hire its own representative and demand re-inspections and re-evaluations of the obvious damages to the property that the carriers ignored.

Hurricane Harvey Bad Faith Insurance Lawsuit Against Rockhill Insurance Company

On August 25, 2017, Hurricane Harvey, made landfall on the Texas coast near the property as a Category 4 hurricane. Immediately after the storm, the plaintiff promptly notified its agent and filed a claim with Rockhill, alerting them to the extensive damages. The plaintiff hired a consultant to assist with the task of determining the extent of the property damage. The plaintiff promptly cooperated with Rockhill’s requests for inspections and additional, extensive requests for documentation related to the business’ income loss as a result of Harvey.

In response to the claim, Rockhill appointed an internal adjuster in Florida to handle the file. This adjuster was inadequately trained and refused to perform a competent investigation. Rockhill’s internal adjuster coordinated on the claim with a known insurer-friendly consulting group who did not inspect the property until late October. The consulting group determined the damage was related to Harvey’s extreme winds, but despite this, Rockhill continued to delay resolution of the claim and instead looked for issues with the wear and tear of the property to avoid paying out.

Hurricane Harvey Insurance Lawsuit on Behalf of a Victoria, Texas Hotel Owner Against Palomar Specialty Insurance Company

On August 25, 2017, Hurricane Harvey swept through Victoria, Texas and caused significant damage to the property. Sizeable portions of the property’s roof were compromised by wind. As a result, there was also interior damage to HVAC, ceiling, insulation, flooring, and drywall. Immediately upon discovering the damages, the plaintiff filed an insurance claim with Palomar.

Palomar’s claims-handling process resulted in a wrongful denial that omitted a wealth of facts, physical evidence, obvious wind damage, and meteorological data from Hurricane Harvey supporting the plaintiff’s claim. Palomar unreasonably pinned the loss on anything but the wind, an action designed to save Palomar hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages to the property and the business.

Palomar assigned an internal adjuster to handle the claim who was located in Indiana. The internal adjuster was unqualified, incapable of adequately assessing the damages to the property, and was the source of many delays throughout the claims process. After utilizing a preferred vendor to inspect the property in December, four months after Harvey hit, Palomar and the internal adjuster continued to delay claim resolution and ignored the insured’s requests for updates.Two months after the inspection, three months after the initial inspection, and after the plaintiff’s representative continuously pressed Palomar and the internal adjuster for updates, the internal adjuster simply said Palomar was “still reviewing” the claim. Palomar eventually denied the claim in February 2018.

Wind and Rainstorm Damage Lawsuit Against The Cincinnati Indemnity Company

A severe windstorm swept across Bexar County on April 12, 2015, causing damage to our client’s hotel, including the roof, exteriors, and interiors of the property. Upon realizing the damage, our client immediately filed a claim with Cincinnati to recover for the damages.

In response to the claim, Cincinnati assigned representatives, adjusters, consultants, and agents to the plaintiff’s file that were inadequately and/or improperly trained. Specifically, Cincinnati assigned an internal representative that failed to perform a thorough investigation of the property and the damage. The plaintiff submitted its own estimate of the damage, but the internal representative refused to acknowledge it. Because of the haphazard inspection, misrepresentations, and inadequate investigation, the windstorm property damage insurance claim was denied.

Hurricane Harvey Insurance Lawsuit Against Palomar Specialty Insurance Company

On August 25, 2017, Hurricane Harvey swept through Texas and caused significant damage to the plaintiff’s property. Sizable portions of the hotel’s roof were compromised by wind, leading to interior damage to ceilings, walls, and flooring. Additionally, the facility’s HVAC, and windows were also damaged by the storm. Upon discovering the damage, the plaintiff filed an insurance claim under the policy with Palomar for damaged caused by the storm.

Palomar assigned adjusters, consultants, and agents to the plaintiff’s file that were inadequately and improperly trained. Specifically, the insurer assigned the claim to an internal adjuster. Palomar and the internal adjuster used a preferred vendor to inspect the hotel property. The preferred vendor was unqualified and incapable of adequately assessing the property damage. All parties involved in Palomar’s workup of the insurance failed to communicate damages estimates or claim status updates. As a result of the adjuster’s inadequate, incomplete, and unreasonable investigation, the commercial property damage insurance claim was denied.

Hail Damage Lawsuit Against Arch Specialty Insurance Company

On April 17, 2015, a severe hailstorm swept across Harris County and caused substantial damage to the plaintiff’s roof, exteriors, and interiors of the property. Immediately after the storm, the plaintiff filed a commercial insurance claim under its policy with Arch for damages caused by the hail. In response to the claim, Arch assigned representatives, adjusters, consultants, and agents to the plaintiff’s file. Specifically, Arch assigned a local adjuster with McLarens Global Claims Services. The local adjuster was inadequately trained to handle this type of claim and failed to perform a thorough investigation.

The local adjuster refused to acknowledge all of the damages to the property and did not prepare any estimates or scope of damages to the property or failed to provide those to the plaintiff. Without an estimate or scope of damages, the plaintiff was forced to prepare its own estimates for the local adjuster. The local adjuster ignored the plaintiff’s estimates and instead retained biased consultants who were not registered with the Texas Department of Insurance. The local adjuster represented to the plaintiff that the hail damage did not occur during Arch’s policy period and was therefore not covered. As a result of the local adjuster’s haphazard inspection, misrepresentations, and inadequate investigation, Arch wrongfully denied the plaintiff’s hail damage insurance claim.

Windstorm Damage Lawsuit Against Everest Indemnity Insurance Company and Engle Martin

On April 18, 2016, a severe windstorm swept through Harris County and caused substantial damage to the roof, exterior, and interior of the plaintiff’s property. Immediately upon discovering the damage, the plaintiff filed an insurance claim with Everest for the damages caused by the windstorm. In response to the claim, Everest assigned adjusters, consultants, and agents to the plaintiff’s file that were inadequately and improperly trained.

Specifically, Everest assigned the claim to Engle Martin, who in turn assigned the claim to an adjuster. The adjuster and Engle Martin failed to perform a thorough investigation of the claim. The adjuster performed a substandard inspection of the property and failed to prepare any estimates or scopes of damages. The employee and Engle Martin also failed to hire qualified experts to properly assess the damage. The employee and Engle Martin performed an inadequate, incomplete, and unreasonable investigation of the plaintiff’s claim, which Everest relied exclusively on to determine what amounts, if any, to pay on the claim.

Insurance Lawsuit Against GuideOne National Insurance Claims and Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London

A March 28, 2014 hail storm caused serious damage to the commercial property, including the roof, windows, exterior, interior, ceilings, furnishings, and more. A subsequent October 12, 2014 windstorm further damaged the property. Immediately following each weather event, our client filed its claims pursuant to its GuideOne insurance policy and its Underwriters policy.

GuideOne, assigned consultants and adjusters the insured contended were incompetent to objectively evaluate the damage. The only adjusters assigned to evaluate the insurance claims prepared damages estimates and the insurers agreed to cover the losses. This assertion, however, later turned out to be a misrepresentation. The complaint alleges that GuideOne, Underwriters, and the individual adjusters wrongfully denied and underpaid our client’s’ claims for building repairs under the policy and that the adjusters wrongly misrepresented that some damages and losses were not covered under the policies when they were. The adjusters and insurers delayed the claims process and the insurance providers refused to issue further payments under the policy, which our client claims has caused them serious financial harm.

Contact Raizner Slania Today & Start Building Your Case

Fill out this form to discuss your case with one of our experienced attorneys
or call us at 844-554-9099.

844-554-9099

Hotel and Motel: Lawsuits Filed

Table of Contents: