Case Study Details

We always bring client satisfaction no matter what the case
Accident Compensation

Accident Compensation

Case Details

Client: Thomas and Meryl Dickley
Attorney: Melissa Mikos
Case Start: 04/07/2022
Execution Time: 2 Months
Result: Winner
Other: Your Custom
Share:

Years Of Experience

Many Prestigious Awards

Experienced Attorney

Free Consulting

Let's win together

Please feel free to contact us. We will get back to you with 1-2 business days. Or just call us now.

Summary Of The Case Studies

Thomas and Meryl found that after a storm, their roof had been damaged. They contacted their insurer, who refused to cover the full cost of the repairs. The insurer said that the nails securing the roof slates had worn out, and the couple’s policy didn’t cover wear and tear.

The Problems Being Encountered of the Case

This wasn’t what Thomas and Meryl thought was right, so they contacted us to investigate to see if this was the right decision.

Our Approach And Solution

We asked for evidence about the wear and tear on the roof. The insurer gave us a note from a phone conversation from its representative. It said that a contractor had gone to Thomas and Meryl’s home to assess the damage. They had noticed that the nails securing the roof slates were rusty. But the insurer couldn’t provide a recording of the conversation or written confirmation from the contractor. They sent photos of the roof, but these weren’t clear enough to show the nails.

Attorney In This Case:

Melissa Mikos

Lawyer, Consultant

Why choose this lawyer: Melissa Mikos worked as a lawyer at two international commercial law firms in Munich from 2010 to 2016. She then joined the Group Legal Department…

Our Working Process and Solution

Thomas and Meryl asked for a second contractor to assess the damage, which the insurer agreed to. On this report, it showed that the damage was because of the storm. It didn’t mention wear and tear. It also wasn’t reasonable to expect a customer to replace nails that are hidden from view. After looking at both reports, we thought that the second report had more detail and authority. This made it much more persuasive.

Solutions 1 Solutions 2 Solutions 3

The insurer reconsiders the claim carefully after the second report

Taking the case to the court

Thomas and Meryl finding a new insurer

Case Image

The Outcome of the Lawsuit

We decided that the insurer should reconsider the claim and pay any settlement due to Thomas and Meryl. We also noted that if tiles had come off before the storm due to the failing nails, then we may have reached a different outcome. The insurer accepted our claim after the second report and Thomas and Meryl were covered for the repairs of their house.

Customer Reviews in this Case

Shopping Cart

No products in the cart.

en_US