Quantcast

Harris County jury rejects homeowner's claim that insurer was liable for Hurricane Harvey damage

SOUTHEAST TEXAS RECORD

Thursday, November 21, 2024

Harris County jury rejects homeowner's claim that insurer was liable for Hurricane Harvey damage

State Court
Gavel

A Harris County jury last week rejected a Houston resident’s property insurance claim alleging that a Texas insurer breached a policy requiring the insurer to pay damages related to Hurricane Harvey’s destructive path in 2017.

Jurors at the Civil County Court on Aug. 24 found that the Texas Fair Plan Association, the state’s property insurer of last resort, was not required to compensate for losses related to windstorm or hail damage to certain rooms of property owned by plaintiff Kim-Lan Thi Vu.

Vu had argued that the association engaged in breach of contract, bad faith dealing, deceptive trade practices, Texas Insurance Code violations, unfair insurance practices and fraud by refusing to pay for the hurricane-related repairs. The plaintiff sought damages of $43,776 as well as possible attorney fees of $750 per hour, arguing that the insurer falsely assured her that wind and hail damage would be covered by her policy, according to the lawsuit.

The complaint alleged that the hurricane damaged her roof, creating openings, and that water leaks caused damage to bedrooms, a stairway and other locations in the house.

The jury was asked whether 13 areas of Vu’s home sustained damage during the Aug. 26, 2017, storm as a result of wind or hail. The five jurors answered “No” to all the specified areas of the home.

“‘Coverage damage’ is direct physical loss to the property that was caused by windstorm or hail and was sudden and accidental,” the jury instructions state. “‘Covered damage’ does not include loss caused by rain, whether or not driven by wind, unless the direct force of wind or hail makes an opening in the roof or wall and rain enters through this opening and causes the damage.”

Vu’s lawsuit alleged the defendant made a misrepresentation to the plaintiff that property damage related to wind and hail damage was covered under the contract and that “any investigation of the loss would be conducted reasonably without pre-determination.”

ORGANIZATIONS IN THIS STORY

More News