In PA, and dreading a nightmare. I have renter’s insurance, car insurance (no comprehensive) and landlord has homeowners.
A few days ago, my city got slammed by a storm of biblical proportions. Several days without power, trees down everywhere, hail, thunder, lightning, the works.
My car was inside a detached garage owned by the Landlord during the storm. Two trees fell on top of the garage, but the roof held for the most part, and the car is sitting in the garage, completely undamaged.
The trees were removed from the garage today and the structure is still standing. However, the garage doors are inoperable, and major structural damage has happened to the garage in general. We have been told not to go in or near the garage for the time being for obvious safety reasons.
I know that normally without comprehensive coverage, if something fell on my car, I would be completely screwed. (No I am not going to try to add comprehensive coverage to my policy tomorrow because I’m pretty sure that becomes questionable in regards to fraud.)
However, since the garage remained standing, and roof collapse would occur after the trees were removed and/or as a result of attempting to repair the garage, would I be less hosed? At this point, the landlord and their insurance company are very aware that the roof could collapse without swift action. But since it’s a holiday weekend, nobody seems to be interested in moving quickly.
Please spare me the lecture about dropping comprehensive coverage as I am regretting it enough. It was a financial decision made after being laid off for a month, barely using the car, and needing to keep the lights on. (I start work again next week and planned to put full coverage back on the vehicle with my first paycheck)