total loss or itemization

[toolmanbeej]

What is the name of your state? missouri


we had a house fire that was considered a total loss. And the insurance company did a great job of paying us for the structure. But they are telling me that the possessions are not a total loss because an unattached shed still had some possessions in it and therefore we need to itemize everything we owned because of that.

It seems crazy itemizing 90% of our possessions because of the 10% that is still left. Are there any other options?

 

[Zigner]

What is the name of your state? missouri


we had a house fire that was considered a total loss. And the insurance company did a great job of paying us for the structure. But they are telling me that the possessions are not a total loss because an unattached shed still had some possessions in it and therefore we need to itemize everything we owned because of that.

It seems crazy itemizing 90% of our possessions because of the 10% that is still left. Are there any other options?

How do you know the value of your items if they're not itemized? Do you have a certain $ payout for total loss?

 

[HomeGuru]

What is the name of your state? missouri


we had a house fire that was considered a total loss. And the insurance company did a great job of paying us for the structure. But they are telling me that the possessions are not a total loss because an unattached shed still had some possessions in it and therefore we need to itemize everything we owned because of that.

It seems crazy itemizing 90% of our possessions because of the 10% that is still left. Are there any other options?

**A: stop complainng and start itemizing.

 

[byrd42]

Sorry to hear about your loss, but unfortunately, this is how the loss settlement has to be handled.

Instead of spending your time on this forum whinig about it, you should be typing your list!!!! You can do some estimate of items like food, bric a brac, toiletries, etc... But take one room at a time. The longer you put it off, the longer it will take to get your check to start to put your life & home back together.

Good Luck!!

 

[alnorth]

The fact that a few of your items escaped damage is irrelevant, they would want an itemised list even if everything you had burned to ashes except your car and the clothes on your back.

For structure its straightforward, its easy to find out how much it costs to replace the house, subject to deductibles and other limits.

For contents, you'll have a coverage limit, but you didnt expect them to just automatically write a check for the limit on a total loss did you? It's a maximum limit, not a minimum, you still need to figure out what you have lost, and they would either pay based on the value/replacement cost (see policy) of that amount, or the limit, whichever is lower. If you only had $10,000 of stuff and a $50,000 contents limit, you'd be way over-insured, you wouldnt get the $50,000.

 

[moburkes]

Yes, they would need the itemized list anyway. Otherwise, it appears that you're expecting them to payout the entire amount for personal property regardless of how much you actually had. For example, your insurance company might automatically assign their policies contents coverage equal to 50% of the dwelling coverage, even if your actual contents coverage is closer to 20% of the dwelling coverage. If that was the case, and they just paid the full amount, on a $100k house, you'd get $50k instead of the $20k that your items were actually worth.

 

[toolmanbeej]

sorry guys didn't mean to sound like I'm whining. I'm just trying to do my homework so that I don't get taken advantage of. I've found that you need to research every avenue when dealing with insurance companies. Because if they can take advantage of you they will.

They told me that they would have paid out for an entire loss on the contents if the unattached shed would have burnt down.

I just wanted to know if that was legal since it was a total loss inside the house. They tried pulling a few things when it came to the structure but Missouri law forced them to pay me the entire insured amount even though it was more than the house was worth. Had I not known about that law I probably would have taken their first offer for 50k less than the law required.

I just wanted to make sure I wasn't making a mistake with the contents in the same manner.

 

[HomeGuru]

sorry guys didn't mean to sound like I'm whining.

They told me that they would have paid out for an entire loss on the contents if the unattached shed would have burnt down.

I just wanted to know if that was legal since it was a total loss inside the house. They tried pulling a few things when it came to the structure but Missouri law forced them to pay me the entire insured amount even though it was more than the house was worth. Had I not known about that law I probably would have taken their first offer for 50k less than the law required.

I just wanted to make sure I wasn't making a mistake with the contents in the same manner.

**A: well, what other options do you really have?

 

[moburkes]

They provided you with incorrect information or your adjuster is very stupid.

 

[toolmanbeej]

none, I guess. my apologies. I thought this forum was for asking questions like that.

 

[Country Living]

One way to itemize your property.

There is freeware available on the internet for cataloging personal property. You can use the online search engines (Google, Yahoo) to learn more about these products. I use one of the packages and have been completely satisfied with it.

If you will PM me, I will give you the name of the product I use. The way it’s laid out may help you walk through the thought process of recreating your inventory.

 

[alnorth]

I just wanted to know if that was legal since it was a total loss inside the house. They tried pulling a few things when it came to the structure but Missouri law forced them to pay me the entire insured amount even though it was more than the house was worth. Had I not known about that law I probably would have taken their first offer for 50k less than the law required.

I just wanted to make sure I wasn't making a mistake with the contents in the same manner.

It's probably not a special insurance law that forced them to pay, it was your insurance contract. If you have replacement coverage for the home, that cost to tear down, clear, and rebuild can often be over the value of the house. Nothing special or legally arcane about it, if you have replacement cost coverage, thats what you get without regard to the market value of the home. (or alternatively, sometimes it will be a modified version where your replacement cost coverage is 125% or 150% of the home's value.)

On the other hand, you may have value or replacement cost coverage on contents, but the value and replacement cost of your stuff is often a LOT less than most people's insured limit. You would still have to itemise if everything burned down. They need you to show reasonable evidence of your damages.

Think of it another way, lets say you have $10,000 of stuff and $100,000 of contents coverage. If you got paid $100,000 on a total loss, then arson would go through the roof. (It already is starting to happen this year, with people burning their way out of sub-prime ARM loans). One of the fundamental guidelines of insurance is to make sure the policyholder is only made whole and doesn't come out way ahead after a loss. If there is a significant financial advantage to turn in a claim, the insurance company will lose a lot of money on all these "unlucky" people having losses all the time.