Tenants Dog Bite and insurance issue

[army judge]

We have rental properties in TN. and one tenant, without permission and in violation of the lease agreement, has a dog that bit a teenager. The short version is that my homeowner's insurance co. says that they won't pay any damages (if we were found liable) because we are not covered for liability.

You LEGALLY appear to have some AFFIRMATIVE defenses in regards to the ALLEGED dog bite incident.

It can't hurt you, in fact it won't cost you one thin dime to make three appointments with attorneys in your vicinity.

Most attorneys offer a free INITIAL consultation.

During the appointment you can get yourself up to speed regarding your potential exposure and/or liability for the dog bite victim.

You might be very surprised after you've participated in these initial discussions.

Based SOLELY upon your recitation of the events that allegedly transpired, your position isn't as devestating as your writing indicates.

Let us know what you learn AFTER you've spoken to at least two attorneys. In fact, I'm going out on a limb here and speculate that you'll be smiling AFTER the conversation with the first attorney.

ALL isn't lost, even if the home in question wasn't insured.

You did have a written lease in place, and your tenant appears to have been in violation of that lease.

 

[Joz II]

Could have just expired with no action on your part to continue it and that could be why you have no documentation of cancellation.

I'm sure I didn't let anything expire. We get a bill, every year on each house. I pay it on time, every year. And the premium goes up a little every year. Liability seems to have just gone away with no explanation. My agent could not explain what happened. At least, we have a lawyer for the dog bite claim. And it looks like they would have to prove a lot of things that aren't true to win the case.

The only document with 14 is a Dwelling Fire Policy from 1/3/22-1/3/23.

Since 14 was the last house, I'm sure it was matched to the other houses that had liability already cancelled (mysteriously).
We'll be out of town this next week so I'll contact a lawyer the following week to see what to do about this.
Thanks so much for your help. I'll post with results when I get them.

 

[Joz II]

Let us know what you learn AFTER you've spoken to at least two attorneys. In fact, I'm going out on a limb here and speculate that you'll be smiling AFTER the conversation with the first attorney.

Been out of town all week and just saw your post.
Yes, our insurance company did assign a lawyer to our case, and I've talked to him a little bit. He was somewhat non-committal on. outcome. He said, we probably won't have to go to TN to appear in court. I did call a couple lawyers in TN but no call back. I'll try a few more next week.
But it looks like, the plaintiff will have to prove 5 or 6 things we are accused of. Not sure how they're going to pull that off since I have emails, the day I first heard of the bite, asking the PM if the tenant has a dog. Thanks for the response.
Here's the allegations. Miranda is the tenant and LB is the minor:

 

[adjusterjack]

our insurance company did assign a lawyer to our case

That's good.

But why?

Has the question of liability coverage on that property been cleared up?

 

[Joz II]

But why?

Has the question of liability coverage on that property been cleared up?

I'm not sure. The denial letter states: "...we will be unable to pay for the loss related to this claim". So, maybe they will defend me and that's it.

 

[adjusterjack]

You should clear that up by talking to the claim rep and/or the attorney.

Be pro-active.

 

[Joz II]

Short update: Info coming in slow. I got a letter from Shelters lawyer stating that they are providing an attorney to defend us but will not cover any payout. And they could, but not for sure, cancel the lawyer for some sort of reasons in the future.

I did call an insurance lawyer and explained my case to the paralegal. She was going to forward the info to the attorney for him to call me. He never did. I think, because the liability part of it is not a current issue and may never be. So, why waste his time.

Still waiting for our current attorney in the bite case. He says, they should be sending out questioners next.
Thanks!!

 

[adjusterjack]

I got a letter from Shelters lawyer stating that they are providing an attorney to defend us but will not cover any payout. And they could, but not for sure, cancel the lawyer for some sort of reasons in the future.

It's called a Reservation of Rights Letter and it's quite common when there is a coverage issue.

If the company attorney has already served an answer to the complaint, then the discovery period has begun. That's where both sides request information from each other. It's like playing poker with all the cards face up. That could take a few months.

I did call an insurance lawyer and explained my case to the paralegal. She was going to forward the info to the attorney for him to call me. He never did. I think, because the liability part of it is not a current issue and may never be. So, why waste his time.

You're probably right about that. But at least you have the resource if you need it.

 

[welkin]

I did call an insurance lawyer and explained my case to the paralegal. She was going to forward the info to the attorney for him to call me. He never did. I think, because the liability part of it is not a current issue and may never be. So, why waste his time.

You don't have to speculate why you never heard back from the attorney. When you call a lawyer that offers a free consultation it's not a consultation at all. If you don't have a winning (money making) case you don't hear anything .

 

[adjusterjack]

When you call a lawyer that offers a free consultation it's not a consultation at all.

That's right. It's a triage to determine if the attorney takes the case.

If you don't have a winning (money making) case you don't hear anything .

That applies to an injured victim seeking an attorney to make a personal injury claim on a contingency.

That's not this.

This is a defendant needing a liability defense attorney to whom he will pay a large retainer against the attorney's hourly rate. Successfully defending the client is the issue. Winning money is not.

 

[welkin]

Winning money is not.

Maybe not for the client but it is for the attorney that represents the client.

 

[adjusterjack]

Have it your way. Not worth arguing the point.