09/02/2026
Her insurance company said her fire claim wasn’t covered. The next day, they changed their answer.
I got a call from the woman in this picture during the early days of COVID.
Her mobile home had burned down.
She had lost her home and her belongings, and then received even more devastating news: the insurance company told her the claim wasn’t covered.
She didn’t know what to do, so she called me.
After talking with her, I learned that she had purchased her insurance online. She owned a mobile home, but the policy she purchased was written for a rancher.
It was an understandable mistake.
I told her, “Don’t panic. I think you’re going to be covered. Let me talk to the adjuster.”
Once she hired us as her Public Adjuster and we submitted our letter of representation, I called the insurance company’s adjuster.
He told me they were preparing to close the claim because there was no coverage.
I asked why.
“Because she has a rancher policy instead of a mobile home policy.”
I told him I didn’t believe that was enough to deny her claim.
Then I asked an important question:
When the policy was issued, did anyone from the insurance company inspect the property and verify that it was actually a rancher?
He didn’t know.
We went back and forth, and before getting off the phone I told him:
“When you have your meeting and figure out that this claim is covered, call me tomorrow so we can move forward.”
He told me I wouldn’t be hearing from him.
The next day, my phone rang.
It was the adjuster.
“I have good news. Your client is covered.”
And that was only the beginning.
Once we started working through the claim, the mobile home was determined to be a total loss. The home had been worth around $80,000, and her personal property was valued at approximately $50,000.
But COVID had turned the market upside down.
Because of supply-chain issues and dramatically increased construction costs, replacing that same mobile home was going to cost approximately $205,000 — and take around eight months to build.
Between the home and personal property, we were now dealing with a claim worth roughly a quarter of a million dollars.
But I saw another problem.
Why spend $205,000 replacing a mobile home that could eventually fall significantly in value again?
She would also continue paying ground rent because she didn’t own the land underneath it.
So I started thinking:
What if we could use this claim to put her in a traditional house instead?
Initially, the insurance company wasn’t interested.
So I looked at the situation from their side.
If the replacement mobile home would take eight months to build, the insurance company could potentially be responsible for months of additional living expenses.
I went back to the adjuster with a proposal:
“If I can get her into a house within 30 days and save the insurance company approximately $18,000 in additional living expenses, will you agree to it?”
He said yes.
I called my client.
“If you can find a house and get under contract within the next 30 days, I believe we can make this work.”
And she did.
Instead of putting the insurance proceeds into a mobile home sitting on someone else’s land, she was able to put that money toward a home and land of her own.
Even better?
Her remaining mortgage payment was less than what she had previously been paying just in ground rent.
Think about where this story started.
Her home burned down.
She was told there was no coverage.
She called us looking for help.
And ultimately, she walked away with something she didn’t have before the fire:
A home of her own, on land of her own, with equity for her future.
That’s why being a Public Adjuster isn’t always just about arguing over numbers.
Sometimes it’s about looking at the entire situation, finding a creative solution, and asking:
“How can we make this claim work better for our client’s life?”
We can’t promise that every claim will have the same outcome.
But we can promise that we’ll look at every angle and fight to get our clients the best result we can.
This is just one story. We have many more.