We had questions about insurance following a theft and arson fire that destroyed our older mobile home and garage. We had coverage for $97,000 for contents, along with up to two years of living expenses while getting a replacement home, along with coverage for the dwelling itself. Our field agent from the insurance company told us to separate the theft losses from the fire losses because the $97,000 in coverage would apply separately to the theft loss and to the fire loss.
Mr Edwards was shocked that the insurance company would consider those seperate claims, and expected them to make us a cash offer to settle the entire claim of somewhere around $75,000 which he recommended that we accept as complete payment for the claim. Coverage for theft of guns was limited to $2,500, but we also had fire damage to a dozen guns that were not stolen. He said that I was limited to the $2,500 yet the policy is very clear that the limit was for THEFT, and the insurance company ia paying for restoration of the guns about the $2,500. To date the insurance has paid us about $175,000 and we expect to get another $20,000 or so for replacement compensation.
Mr Edwards made us feel like we have zero rights, and that we were at the complete mercy of the insurance company. Honestly, I said to my wife as we left his office, "we need to talk to another attorney" because his advice was so concerning to me. We did talk to another attorney a week or two later that gave us advice that was about 180 degrees opposite to what was recommended by Mr Edwards.