california property fraud insurance construction-law
Annoying neighbor abusing insurance claims
<p>My mom's neighborhood was effected by the California wildfires. Her house was untouched, but it destroyed the fence that stood between her backyard and the backyard of a neighbor.<br>
Insurance has already approved the construction of a replacement fence; however, the neighbor is refusing to sign off on the construction. The neighbor works in construction, and is claiming that he and his friends in the industry will replace the fence themselves. My mom suspects that he is trying to drag his feet until my mom pays the full price for the fence, so that he can pocket the insurance pay out that was designated for the fence. <br>
He pulled a similar scheme when my mom moved in the house, so that he did not have to contribute to paying for a fence between the two properties.<br><br>
What can we do to make him pay his half for the replacement fence? I have considered reporting him for insurance fraud.</p>

<p>This is a context where you need to lawyer up. There are two issues, his share of the costs, and his permission to construct in part on his property. You mother has the same rights, so she likewise can refuse to sign off on his scheme (the lawyers negotiate a resolution). Assuming both parties are insured and (to make it more complex) have different insurance companies, the companies limit how much they will contribute for their part of the damage. Normally, you find a contractor who will do it for a given price, let's say $10,000, and the parties split the cost. Both parties have an interest in the choice of contractor because of cost issues, and quality of product and service (though the insurance company cares about the cost). If one of the parties is a contractor, they too can legitimately submit a bid, and then the parties can decide which is the best bid.</p>

<p>It is not fraud if a contractor, who is an insured, submits a bid and makes a profit on the job. It would be fraud if that party withheld material facts from an insurance company. In the context of massive disaster insurance claims, the insurance companies may not perform a rigorous investigation (e.g. may not ask for multiple bids). It would then be a material fact that one of the insureds stood to profit from this arrangement, so the insurance companies would likely wish to see evidence that the costs were not unreasonably inflated. If the neighbors bid is in line with industry standard (and the insurance companies know who the contractor is), there is nothing fishy about the arrangement.</p>

<p>This assumes that both parties are being cooperative with each other. When that is not the case, lawyers are good at getting cooperation (not letting the other party push their client around).</p>
