I have a very strange case going where I had an agreement with the landlord to supply materials fo repairs to fix an apartment I was to rent. After the repairs were made the landlord reneged and in order to not pay me called the repairs unauthorized alterations and destruction of property. In her cross-complaint the landlord went as far as calling the repairs intentional destruction and vandalism. I have before and after pictures of walls being scraped and fixed and looking better after the repairs. The landlord used those excuses then to power and control me and threaten me into not paying. Now that I'm suing she claims I had some bizarre plan to destroy property in order to create habitablilty violations in order to live there for free, all baseless. All habitability violations there were pre-existent and the landlord failed to repair those during the above repairs because the costs wee too high. what I'm suspecting is that the landlord has made a fraudulent claim to her homeowner's insurance company claiming that I vandalized the place and asking the company to defend her from my suit. I wouldn't put it by her. Assuming my facts are true, when the insurance company realizes what is going on, what will they do to her? The facts are that I only had an contract to provide materials, other people made the repairs, I had no personal injury and only about $50 property damage from water flooding the apartment after the repairs, yet I sued her for many intentional torts, which I believe are not covered by insurance in California. I can't understand why on my facts a homeowner's insurance company would defend her. No insurance company has tried to locate me yet she claims that an attorney for the insurance company is about to substitute in as her third attorney in a row.
Asker
Posted over 13 years ago.
I have a very strange case going where I had an agreement with the landlord to supply materials fo repairs to fix an apartment I was to rent. After the repairs were made the landlord reneged and in order to not pay me called the repairs unauthorized alterations and destruction of property. In her cross-complaint the landlord went as far as calling the repairs intentional destruction and vandalism. I have before and after pictures of walls being scraped and fixed and looking better after the repairs. The landlord used those excuses then to power and control me and threaten me into not paying. Now that I'm suing she claims I had some bizarre plan to destroy property in order to create habitablilty violations in order to live there for free, all baseless. All habitability violations there were pre-existent and the landlord failed to repair those during the above repairs because the costs wee too high. what I'm suspecting is that the landlord has made a fraudulent claim to her homeowner's insurance company claiming that I vandalized the place and asking the company to defend her from my suit. I wouldn't put it by her. Assuming my facts are true, when the insurance company realizes what is going on, what will they do to her? The facts are that I only had an contract to provide materials, other people made the repairs, I had no personal injury and only about $50 property damage from water flooding the apartment after the repairs, yet I sued her for many intentional torts, which I believe are not covered by insurance in California. I can't understand why on my facts a homeowner's insurance company would defend her. No insurance company has tried to locate me yet she claims that an attorney for the insurance company is about to substitute in as her third attorney in a row.