Posted On: February 17, 2007, 7:06 am CST

Posted By: William

Damn Bob, that was a well thought out and reasonable response. One which I totally agree. What Senter has ruled is that the concurrent causation clause is ambiguous and unenforcible. And in the Broussard case basically said since they ( SF ) admitted wind damage but failed to prove percentages, he awarded full policy limits. In my personal case USAA settled for about half of my structure and contents coverage. It was, with the evidence I submitted a fair settlement in my estimation.