I agree that simply paying the premium doesn’t automatically invalidate a contract, and I’m not disputing that renters insurance would have been needed for our personal property.
My question isn’t about entitlement to coverage for belongings.
It’s about material misrepresentation and claim handling.
Specifically:
• The policy was written as owner-occupied.
• The insured had not lived there for years.
• Occupancy was misrepresented during the investigation.
• Displaced occupants have been housed through ALE.
• Housing is now being terminated mid-rebuild with funds remaining.
I understand that in a typical arm’s-length landlord/tenant situation, tenants wouldn’t receive ALE from a homeowner’s policy. But in this case, State Farm has already treated us as displaced occupants and provided housing through the claim.
So I’m trying to understand how carriers generally handle situations where long-term occupancy status was inaccurate and where ALE has already been extended to non-named occupants.
I’m not trying to turn this into a family issue. I mentioned context only to explain why communication has broken down.
I’m looking for professional insight on coverage and risk exposure in this specific scenario, not sympathy.