4 ms·
>The homeowner claims he's out $400k total for various reasons, beyond what insurance covered. That is not what the homeowner claimed. He claimed his damages
by throwaway_law 7y ago
>The homeowner claims he's out $400k total for various reasons, beyond what insurance covered.
That is not what the homeowner claimed. He claimed his damages were $400k total, and the house was covered.
What wasn't covered were the contents of the home because it was a rental and the renter didn't have renter's insurance.
Also there were some runaway costs to the owner in the rebuild because the owner repoured the foundation (which wasn't damaged) in order to build a bigger home.
>They chose to wreck the house.
And he choose not to rebuild on the existing undamaged foundation and lay a new foundation to build a bigger home, but the damages to make the homeowner whole were otherwise covered by insurance.
- shantly 7y agoAh, good point, I read those were his expenses and didn't catch that was before insurance reimbursement. Looks like the actual damages beyond that are just loss of personal property in the house and whatever it cost to deal with the whole, you know, police-blew-up-my-house situation, which is surely non-trivial but likely well under $400,000.