FOLLOW US

(USA Herald) – This is the case of Franssen Condominium Association of Apartment Owners v. Country Mutual Insurance Co. et al., in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.

When it comes to property damage, policyholders often find themselves at a disadvantage when dealing with insurance companies. In a recent case, Franssen Condominium Association of Apartment Owners, a Seattle-area condominium, was denied coverage by their insurer, Travelers, for water damage to the buildings they owned. A Washington federal jury found that the condominium failed to inform Travelers of the property damage in a timely manner, clearing the insurer of paying for the condo's losses.

According to investigative paralegal, Samuel Lopez from the USA Herald, this case is a prime example of how insurance companies can use policy exclusions to deny coverage for damages that policyholders believe should be covered. In this case, the jury found that the buildings were damaged at least in part by wind-driven rain, which might have been covered, but the condo failed to promptly inform Travelers of the damage.

The Franssen Condominium Association of Apartment Owners had said in its second amended complaint that much of its damage was to delaminated exterior gypsum sheathing and that deterioration was first discovered in 2018. They sought coverage from its insurers beginning in 2019 but was denied. As a result, they sued their insurers in 2021 for breach of contract, bad faith, negligence and violating the Washington Consumer Protection Act, among other things.

Travelers said in court papers that its final policy with the condo expired in 2002. "The Travelers defendants and the Association did not interact with one another for almost 18 years," the insurer said, explaining that there was no proof of when the damage in question actually occurred. As a result of the lack of precision in pinpointing a date of damage, Travelers said, it should not have to cover the loss.

The jury found that some of the damage occurred as far back as 1995, around 11 years after the building was erected. However, the condo was slow to discover the water damage, according to court filings, and ultimately the jury said it did not notify Travelers in a timely fashion.

This case highlights the importance of policyholders notifying their insurance companies of any potential property damage as soon as possible. Many policyholders may not fully understand the implications of notifying their insurance companies in a timely manner, and may find themselves in a similar situation as Franssen Condominium Association of Apartment Owners. Policyholders should be aware of the importance of timely notification to avoid similar situations.

In conclusion, the recent case of Franssen Condominium Association of Apartment Owners v. Country Mutual Insurance Co. et al., in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, is a prime example of how insurance companies can use policy exclusions to deny coverage for damages that policyholders believe should be covered. Policyholders must be aware of the importance of timely notification to avoid similar situations.

For more information on cases like this, you can read the articles written by Samuel Lopez, an investigative paralegal with the USA Herald, on our website: www.usaherald.com/