By The Restoration HQ desk · · filed under Coverage Law
Coverage law: nine lessons for Palisades/Altadena wildfire-smoke claims (Pollock v. Federal)
Merlin broke down Pollock v. Federal into nine takeaways for handling wildfire-smoke damage claims, aimed squarely at the Palisades and Altadena fire aftermath.
FORWildfire-smoke restoration is a real, defensible line of work, and the case law is starting to back thorough documentation. Learn to scope smoke correctly and you win claims other shops walk away from.
AGAINSTSmoke claims are a documentation minefield, and one policyholder-friendly case doesn't change how carriers actually adjust. Don't over-promise homeowners on coverage a court hasn't guaranteed.
Consensus vs. contrarianConsensus: smoke damage is under-paid and under-litigated. Contrarian worth owning: the winning move in smoke claims is lab data and standardized testing protocols, not legal theory, the operators who invest in defensible testing set the price, the ones who argue set themselves up to lose.
Sources Merlin Law Group, www.propertyinsurancecoveragelaw.com/blog/po… ()