N.J. property owners say water damage to Philly residence wasn't covered by Liberty Mutual

By Nicholas Malfitano | Jun 14, 2017

N.J. property owners say water damage to Philly residence wasn't covered by Liberty Mutual

PHILADELPHIA – Plaintiffs and New Jersey-based landlords believe their insurance unfairly denied them coverage for extensive water damage which occurred at their property in Philadelphia, and have initiated legal action to recover monetary damages for their expenses incurred therein.

Jason Valentino and Phyllis Valentino of Margate, N.J. filed suit in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on June 2 versus Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, of Boston, Mass.

“On or about Dec. 6, 2016, while the policy was in full force and effect, plaintiff suffered direct physical loss and damage to the insured property believed to be the result of a peril insured against the policy, to wit, a sudden and accidental water discharge from a plumbing, heating, air conditioning, fire protective sprinkler system or household appliance, resulting in damage to the insured premises and those areas and to the extent set forth in the preliminary estimate of loss,” the complaint reads.

“Notice of this covered loss was given to defendant in a prompt and timely manner and plaintiff, at all relevant times, fully complied with all of the terms and conditions required by the policy. Defendant, despite demand for benefits under the policy, has refused, without legal justification or cause, and continues to refuse, to pay to plaintiff monies owed for the damages suffered as a result of the loss. Solely as a result of the defendant’s failure and refusal to pay benefits to plaintiff as required under the policy, plaintiff has suffered loss and damage in an amount not in excess of $50,000,” the complaint continues.

The Valentinos believe their coverage denial was done without “a reasonable basis in fact” and constitutes both a breach of the insurance contract and acting in bad faith, the latter due to sending multiple pieces of correspondence the plaintiffs believe conveyed false information with respect to the breadth and scope of the insurance policy, among other alleged violations of the insurance contract.

“For the reasons set forth above, defendant has acted in bad faith in violation of 42 Pa.C.S.A. Section 8371, for which defendant is liable for statutory damages including interest from the date the claim was made in an amount equal to the prime rate of interest plus three percent, court costs, attorney’s fees, punitive damages and such other compensatory and/or consequential damages as are permitted by law,” the suit states.

For counts of breach of contract and bad faith, the plaintiff is seeking damages not in excess of $50,000, plus interest, court costs, counsel fees and delay damages in this matter.

The plaintiff is represented by Mario Barnabei of the Law Offices of Jonathan Wheeler, in Philadelphia.

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas case 170504637

From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nickpennrecord@gmail.com

Want to get notified whenever we write about Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas ?

Sign-up Next time we write about Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, we'll email you a link to the story. You may edit your settings or unsubscribe at any time.

Organizations in this Story

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas

More News

The Record Network