BC Fire Loss Claims Help
Resolving Problems With BC Fire Loss Claims
If you suffer property damage in a fire at your home or place of business, you should be able to rely on your insurer for prompt service and full coverage for the losses you can prove, up to the point of the policy limits. Some fire insurance claims proceed exactly in this manner.
However, many claimants experience resistance by the insurer at any of several points in the claim resolution process. Some claims are met with suspicions of arson and fraud from the very beginning. Others move through the system smoothly until the insurer sees the size of the loss claim. If you encounter difficulties with your insurer or if you receive a notice of denial of your claim, contact Murphy Battista LLP for advice about your options.
Murphy Battista’s legal team knows how to address and overcome obstacles to coverage for denied fire insurance claims in Greater Vancouver and throughout British Columbia. We act for clients whose problems with coverage involve any one or more of the following circumstances:
- Denial of the claim on the basis of disputed occupancy
- Denial of the claim on the basis of financial problems on the part of the insured
- Cancellation of coverage based on allegations of fraud or arson
- Threatened cancellation for overstating losses or inconsistencies in the proof of claim
- Denial based on disputed conditions or exclusions in the fire insurance policy
- Claim negotiation tactics involving threats to refer the matter for prosecution unless the insured accepts a compromise amount
- Refusal to pay the full amount of the insured’s loss of use or business loss damages
At Murphy Battista, our success with the resolution of fire loss claims depends on three basic strengths of our practice: our skill with evidence on contested claims, our thorough understanding of BC insurance law, and our total commitment to the interests of our clients through every stage of the claims resolution process.
BC Insurance Claim Denial Lawyers
If your insurance company refuses to payout under a fire insurance policy or denies coverage on a fire loss claim, contact us for a free consultation regarding your legal and practical options.
Residential and Business Loss Insurance Claims: What You Need to Know and How a Lawyer can Help
July 7, 2021
The number one thing to understand about residential and business loss insurance policies is that, as the insured, it is YOUR responsibility to prove your losses. In other words, you should not rely on your insurance company or a contractor to prove your claim. Further, it is up to you…Continue Reading
Insurance Disputes: What are household belongings worth?
November 10, 2014
People buy home or tenants insurance so they are covered if the unexpected happens. But even if damage is covered by insurance, will you and your insurance company be able to agree on the value of lost items and the appropriate cost of repairs? Today CBC’s Go Public reported about…Continue Reading
Fire Insurance: If Your Tenant Contributes To Insurance, Buy Insurance
September 9, 2014
If a landlord collects contributions to fire insurance from tenants as part of the lease agreement, the expectation is that fire insurance will be purchased. In reasons released last week, Giddings Holdings Ltd. v. High, 2014 BCSC 1658, an unfortunate landlord failed to insure his building despite the lease including a proportionate…Continue Reading
Complex Home Insurance Policies Aren’t Good For Anyone
June 18, 2015
The CBC recently contacted me to comment on a story that perfectly represents the growing problem of insurers hiding behind complex policies. The story is covered in full at the CBC Website. However, in brief it concerns a couple, Michael and Diane Uniac, who for the past 19 years have…Continue Reading
Disclaimer: The outcome of every legal proceeding will vary according to the facts and unique circumstances in each individual case. References to successful case results where the lawyers at Murphy Battista LLP have acted for clients are not necessarily a guarantee or indicative of future results.
Kevin Gourlay acted for two owners of a rental property in Maple Ridge. They thought they were properly insured but when a fire happened, they were denied coverage by their insurer because the home was between tenants and the policy said they had no coverage while the home was “vacant.” The plaintiffs brought a claim against their insurance broker for failing to advise them of the potential gaps in their coverage. The Court concluded that the broker was negligent and was the sole cause of the lack of coverage.