Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 2
Is it two casualties?

With the caveat that I know precious little about this, that sounds like the winner (bad choice of words) to me. I'm basically hanging this conclusion on the "sudden, unexpected" aspect of casualty losses that I seem to recall.

The windstorm was such an event. One could argue that the prudent homeowner would have looked for damage after that. (This thought may well be influenced by my Kansas roots, since in those parts people are often checking their roofs. I also recall more than one case in which the homeowner got the insuror to pay for part of a roof replacement that was due anyway.)

Since the roof damage went undiscovered, the water damage was likewise sudden and unexpected, in a separate event, the rains.

Not that I know it would really matter, but how did the insuror treat it?

Phil
Rule Your Retirement Home Fool
Print the post  

Announcements

Disclaimer:
In accordance with IRS Circular 230, you cannot use the contents of any post on The Motley Fool's message boards to avoid tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax law provisions.
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.