No compensation for Greenwood Village family after police destroy home, court rules

[Irving]

Here is the original thread about the stand off: https://www.ar-15.co/threads/148963-...enwood+village


Here is the updated thread where the police department agrees to pay $5,000: https://www.ar-15.co/threads/157734-...enwood+village

[def90]

An article I read stated that the home itself was insured and was rebuilt under insurance however the couple that was renting/living in the home did not have renters insurance so their belongings that were destroyed were not covered.

[.455_Hunter]

An article I read stated that the home itself was insured and was rebuilt under insurance however the couple that was renting/living in the home did not have renters insurance so their belongings that were destroyed were not covered.

That's what I am trying to figure out. If the guys insurance policy covered what happened, then the story loses a lot of punch.

[def90]

That's what I am trying to figure out. If the guys insurance policy covered what happened, then the story loses a lot of punch.

This is what I found:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...d-court-rules/

"His expenses to rebuild the house and replace all its contents cost him nearly $400,000, he said. While insurance did cover structural damage initially, his son did not have renter’s insurance and so insurance did not cover replacement of the home’s contents, and he says he is still in debt today from loans he took out.

“This has ruined our lives,” he said.

Gallegos stressed that any large expenses Lech incurred are because he chose to do more than necessary, and chose to “repour the foundation that wasn’t damaged, and [build] a bigger better house where the old one stood.” Lech insisted starting from scratch was necessary."

Another article:

https://thecrimereport.org/2019/10/3...ice-destroyed/

"The city refused to compensate Lech’s family but offered $5,000 in temporary rental assistance and for the insurance deductible."

[BushMasterBoy]

You can petition the legislature and maybe get the state to pay damages by legislation. Below is the ruling by the federal court.
You can bet if it was the judges house, the outcome would be different.


https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/18/18-1051.pdf

[MrPrena]

I am fairly certain some funny fire casualty company like state farm, farmers, liberty, statewide will come up with a commercial and start writing insurance for that.

Meanwhile I am fairly sure companies like AIG will write a customized special insurance.

[Irving]

As much as I'd like to jump in on this conversation, I feel like it does nothing to steer to thread back to what it's supposed to be about.

[CS1983]

Until the militarization of police forces and their TTP’s is rolled back, and as long as they continue to have immunity from the consequence of overzealous attempts at whatever, and until the Nuremberg defense as applied to domestic police work is no longer a thing, stuff like this will continue to be a thing.

[GilpinGuy]

Until the militarization of police forces and their TTP’s is rolled back, and as long as they continue to have immunity from the consequence of overzealous attempts at whatever, and until the Nuremberg defense as applied to domestic police work is no longer a thing, stuff like this will continue to be a thing.

Amen.

[Martinjmpr]

An article I read stated that the home itself was insured and was rebuilt under insurance however the couple that was renting/living in the home did not have renters insurance so their belongings that were destroyed were not covered.

That's what I am trying to figure out. If the guys insurance policy covered what happened, then the story loses a lot of punch.

This is what I found:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...d-court-rules/

"His expenses to rebuild the house and replace all its contents cost him nearly $400,000, he said. While insurance did cover structural damage initially, his son did not have renter’s insurance and so insurance did not cover replacement of the home’s contents, and he says he is still in debt today from loans he took out.

“This has ruined our lives,” he said.

Gallegos stressed that any large expenses Lech incurred are because he chose to do more than necessary, and chose to “repour the foundation that wasn’t damaged, and [build] a bigger better house where the old one stood.” Lech insisted starting from scratch was necessary."

Another article:

https://thecrimereport.org/2019/10/3...ice-destroyed/

"The city refused to compensate Lech’s family but offered $5,000 in temporary rental assistance and for the insurance deductible."

So let's sum up:

1. The house was insured. Insurance paid for the damage. But the owner built a bigger house than what was there before and thus incurred more costs than were covered by insurance. The city offered to cover the insurance deductible and temporary housing expenses, which the homeowner refused.

So this isn't about "gubberment bad!!!" but rather this is someone trying to cash in on an unfortunate event. Like if your 10 year old Hyundai gets hit by a drunk driver while parked in front of your house and you demand they replace it with a new Mercedes.

2. There was apparently a renter who did not have renter's insurance living there. This is not the fault of Greenwood Village.