{"id":21702,"date":"2018-08-07T00:10:56","date_gmt":"2018-08-07T04:10:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.propertyinsurancecoveragelaw.com\/?p=21702"},"modified":"2018-08-07T00:10:56","modified_gmt":"2018-08-07T04:10:56","slug":"can-appraisal-take-place-over-property-that-has-been-demolished","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.propertyinsurancecoveragelaw.com\/blog\/can-appraisal-take-place-over-property-that-has-been-demolished\/","title":{"rendered":"Can Appraisal Take Place Over Property That Has Been Demolished?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Florida\u2019s Federal Middle District believes it can.1<\/sup> After Hurricane Irma struck its commercial building in Port Charlotte, Florida, building owners Etcetera, Etc, Inc., filed an insurance claim under their policy with Evanston Insurance Company (\u201cEvanston\u201d). Evanston began its investigation, and as that was underway Charlotte County also inspected the building and issued a \u201cNotice of Unsafe Building\u201d stating the building \u201cwas in danger of collapse.\u201d<\/p>\n

The County\u2019s notice gave the building owners (\u201cthe insureds\u201d) two options: they could either repair or demolish their building. If they chose repairing it, they had to secure all necessary permits and commence the work within 30 days, complying with all applicable building codes. If they opted to demolish the building, they had to secure all permits associated with demolition, including debris removal and complete the demolition within 30 days. If the insureds failed to comply with either option, the County would demolish the building after the 30 days lapsed. The insureds opted to demolish the building.<\/p>\n

After receiving a copy of the County\u2019s Notice, Evanston Insurance Company sent a letter to its insureds stating that it did not believe the property needed to be demolished, and that in fact, the County\u2019s notice made it clear that the property could be repaired. Evanston also hired an engineer who agreed the building could be repaired instead of demolished. Evanston further told its insureds that any decision to demolish the property would be voluntary and would not be related to a covered loss. The insureds responded to Evanston acknowledging that although there was some pre-existing damage, Hurricane Irma had caused more damage making it a \u201ctotal loss.\u201d The letter also notified Evanston that if they wanted to re-inspect the insureds\u2019 building, they needed to do so right away, as the demolition would occur within the next few weeks.<\/p>\n

At first, Evanston responded to its insureds by stating it would re-open the claim and schedule a re-inspection to occur. Nonetheless, less than a week before the re-inspection was scheduled, the insureds received correspondence from Evanston Insurance Company that although it acknowledged some covered damage, it was still their position that the property could be repaired (and did not need to be demolished), and for an amount that fell below the windstorm and hail deductible. Accordingly, Evanston did not make payment, but instead told its insureds to submit a repair estimate if it disagreed with Evanston\u2019s position. Instead of awaiting an estimate or continuing to negotiate, Evanston Insurance Company filed a Complaint for Declaratory Judgment against its insureds asking the court to find that,<\/p>\n