Water Leak Insurance Claim — Rancho Cucamonga, CA
Settlement Results
Case Overview
Avner Gat Inc. represented the owner of a 2,500-square-foot single-family home in Rancho Cucamonga in a water leak insurance claim involving two plumbing failures and extensive first-floor water damage.
By the time Avner Gat Inc. became involved, Mercury had paid $21,000 toward repairs and the initial drying work but was refusing additional payment. Questions remained about whether the property had been properly dried and whether the repair scope accounted for all affected materials.
Public adjuster Jeff Janes reviewed the existing scope and pushed for additional evaluation to determine whether the home had been fully dried and whether the repair scope was complete.
Key Claim Issues Addressed
The claim centered on several disputed conditions and repair-scope questions:
- Questions about whether the initial drying had addressed all remaining moisture
- Remaining wet flooring after the initial drying work
- Disagreement over how much first-floor flooring required removal and replacement
- Two flooring types affecting the scope of the first-floor repairs
- Dirty water affecting materials in and around the kitchen
- A limited initial scope for kitchen cabinetry
- Refusal to issue additional payment beyond the initial $21,000
The Challenge: A Water Leak Insurance Claim With Incomplete Drying and Disputed Repair Scope
Two plumbing failures occurred during the same week. A supply line burst on one side of the kitchen, while a sewer line beneath the kitchen developed a crack. The resulting water damage extended throughout the downstairs, including the kitchen, family room, entry, and other affected first-floor areas.
The initial mitigation work removed only some cabinetry and flooring. The home also had two types of flooring on the first floor, creating additional questions about how much material needed to be removed to properly address the remaining moisture. The kitchen presented a separate scope issue. Mercury had initially included payment for only a limited number of lower cabinets.
When Jeff reviewed the water leak insurance claim several months after the loss, Mercury had already paid $21,000 and was refusing additional payment. The remaining dispute was whether moisture remained after the initial drying effort and whether the repair scope accounted for all affected first-floor flooring and kitchen materials.
The Solution: Reassessing Moisture, Flooring, and Kitchen Scope
Jeff focused on three unresolved questions: whether moisture remained, how far the affected flooring extended, and whether the kitchen scope reflected the water exposure. A second drying assessment and a flooring evaluation helped establish what the original scope had missed.
Confirming Remaining Moisture With a Second Drying Assessment
Jeff recommended that the homeowner hire a second drying company to determine whether the initial drying work had fully addressed the affected areas.
The second assessment identified additional flooring that was still wet. It also determined that the water affecting the materials was dirty rather than clean, raising additional concerns about the materials in and around the kitchen.
Those findings supported a reassessment of the demolition and repair scope that had been approved initially.
Expanding the First-Floor Flooring Scope
The initial scope included removal of only part of the kitchen flooring, even though the second drying assessment showed that additional flooring remained wet.
Jeff used those findings to argue for additional demolition and asked Mercury to bring in a flooring expert to evaluate the affected tile and determine how the first-floor flooring should be addressed.
Following the flooring evaluation and further discussions, the insurance company agreed to pay for removal and replacement of the flooring throughout the first floor rather than only partial flooring removal in the kitchen.
Reassessing the Kitchen After Dirty Water Exposure
Mercury had initially included payment for only a limited number of lower cabinets. The second drying assessment determined that dirty water had affected the area. Jeff argued that the limited cabinet scope did not account for that exposure and that the kitchen needed to be fully replaced. Mercury ultimately agreed to pay for replacement of the entire kitchen.
The Outcome: From a $21,000 Initial Payment to a $205,000 Recovery
The water leak insurance claim ultimately reached a total recovery of $205,000, compared with the $21,000 Mercury had paid before Avner Gat Inc. became involved. The additional recovery consisted of $134,000 for repairs and $50,000 in additional living expenses, bringing the total additional recovery to $184,000, an 876% increase over the initial payment.
The final repair scope included work that Mercury had not fully accounted for at the start. It covered removal and replacement of the flooring throughout the first floor and replacement of the entire kitchen after additional evaluations identified remaining wet flooring and confirmed that dirty water had affected the materials.
What Our Client Said
“Mr. Janes would always take the time to explain next steps and would always be available for additional questions.”
— Max V., Yelp Review, September 2025
The homeowner credited Avner Gat Inc. and Jeff Janes with helping challenge the insurance company's position and recover damage costs associated with the water loss.
Does Your Water Leak Claim Cover the Full Repair Scope?
An initial payment or repair estimate may not account for every area affected by a water loss, especially when questions remain about drying, flooring, cabinetry, or other connected materials.
If your water leak insurance claim has been underpaid, delayed, or disputed, Avner Gat Inc. can review the claim documentation, repair scope, and current carrier position to help determine what options may remain.
