Trump finds the most practical solution to Irma, and Harvey.
- Thread starter Max E.
- Start date
Oh, look. Current track spares Maralago.
Lib dreams shattered.
Trump haters hoping Hurricane Irma hits Mar-A-Lago
legalinsurrection.com/.../why-do-these-folks-hope-hurricane-irma-destroys-trumps-m...
3 days ago
And depression sets in.
Lib dreams shattered.
Trump haters hoping Hurricane Irma hits Mar-A-Lago
legalinsurrection.com/.../why-do-these-folks-hope-hurricane-irma-destroys-trumps-m...
3 days ago
And depression sets in.
Trump is probably disappointed he won't be able to claim a couple of hundred million dollars for non existing damages to lara-maga.
So an insurance adjuster came out and the insurance company evaluated the damage and agreed to give him $17 million dollars. I don't see what the issue is.
When Hurricane Fran came through North Carolina and dropped over a dozen trees on my house, we sent the insurance company pictures (at their request) and they sent me a check for over $10K for the damage. I cut all the trees off my house (with the help of neighbors), repaired my minor roof damage, fixed the fence and bought a new swing set for the kids. I did not spend anywhere near $10K. Same type of situation.
You probably photo-shopped the ''over a dozen trees on your house''
did you miss the part where the butler said ''It has never lost more than a few tiles and palm trees in ANY hurricane''.
did you miss the part where the butler said ''It has never lost more than a few tiles and palm trees in ANY hurricane''.
Well --- then the insurance company can only blame themselves for not properly evaluating the actual cost of damage including time & labor, etc. For a claim this large, I assume that the insurance company would actually send someone on site to evaluate the claim - if the insurance company failed to do this then, once again, they can only blame themselves.
Insurance company is doing a cost estimate on what it would cost to pay a pro in a high demand period which @ 400/tree isn't unreasonable (talking about real trees here).
Yes, this is what they did. At that time they credited $600 per tree that landed on the house. All were large oaks. My home at the time backed up to a creek and the back yard was sloped towards it. Most of the oaks were blown over with saturated root systems and slowly settled on the house, which was fortunate since between the fence, upper screened porch, swing set and slope of the yard slowing the trees, I did not get any holes in the roof of the main house. Most of my neighbors had multiple holes in their roofs and we put up blue tarps over them. Took a lot of time to cut up those trees.
The insurance companies did not have enough adjusters to send everywhere. Instead they asked for pictures unless the claim damage value was over some threshold. We took pictures of the trees and damage well before ever sending the pictures to the insurance company -- in fact we had fixed some of the damage (except main roof shingle replacement, porch screening, and crushed porch roof) and removed the trees before we ever were able to contact the insurance office (two weeks later (no phone, electric, etc.). It took a week to clear the roads to get anywhere and back in those days you had to get the pictures developed (film).