Insurance frustrations

In January, we had a leak in our then-unoccupied condo continue until our underneath neighbor noticed some discoloration in her plaster. An emergency visit by sister and condo board manager confirmed a total disaster. Five months, countless emails and middle-of-night phone calls, and a few more visits by my sister later, and finally our pipes, walls, and floors were repaired. The condo was put on the market and rented out within three weeks. 

The insurance saga, however, continues. I'm sure the saga of the insurance company would continue if I were in the US or overseas, seeing how the modus operandi of the majority of insurance companies (State Farm in this case) seems to be to just keep saying no until the insured gives up. Except I'm really not in a mood to give up on this one. 

I did give up the first time our claims agent refused to pay the repair damage for our underneath neighbor. After reviewing her small claim (about $300) with our condo manager, who advised that he did not agree with State Farm's legal interpretation of the condo regs and the underneath neighbor could take us to a small claims court, we decided from our sanity perspective - and the responsibility of being a good neighbor - to just pay the small amount to repair her plaster. After all, if it weren't for her call, the water could have leaked for much longer causing even more damage.

In the course of the repairs, the flooring company found additional damage to our concrete slab. So I appealed to State Farm to increase the amount of our settlement by $600 to cover the repair for this repair not covered by the original assessment when the damaged wood floor was in place. Just now -- June 4 -- I received an email saying that she reviewed my claim and did not think the damage was caused by the leak. 

I requested further explanation as to how she reached that determination, as I disagreed with her assessment. Having owned the condo since 2003 with no noticeable issue with the floors, I figured I was due more than one sentence explanation. Instead of an actual explanation, though, I just received the following one sentence response: 

"As noted in the correspondence emailed to you, the damage to your concrete slab was unrelated to your water loss, and I am unable to issue payment on this portion of your loss." 

Any additional correspondence must be by phone, but never once has she actually answered the phone when I've stayed up to call. Every single call went straight to voice mail. And even though I remind her in the voice mail to please call at the start or end of her work day to compensate for the time zone differences, she has managed to return my call (when she remembers to) between 2AM and 3AM Manila time, or about 2PM and 3PM east coast time. 

Not really feeling that "like a good neighbor" vibe. Nor do I put my odds of getting the $600 very high, but I will try this time.