Here's a copy of the Aiken pretrial order. - Insurance Coverage Blog

portion of the house was damaged due to wind forces. There were other changes.
In early 2006 representatives of USAA informed representatives of Rimkus
Consulting Group, Inc. that they were not satisfied with the Rimkus engineering
report. Specifically, the Chapa and Jordan reports were changed to lessen if not
eradicate the determination that wind was the dominate force in the Aikens’ loss.
When Dr. Aiken first reported his claim to USAA he was encouraged to pursue a
flood claim. Dr. Aiken was informed by USAA that the flood claim would be
ratified in short order and that his first step should be to pursue the federally
guaranteed/sponsored flood provision within his insurance coverage. Pursuant to
USAA’s recommendation, Dr. Aiken did pursue and collect flood coverage in the
full and true amount of $278,000.
Dr. Aiken will present evidence that Rimkus issued a report entitled “Report
Conclusions.” That report instructed Rimkus personnel to take out bad language
“language which would dictate coverage” and change the bad language to better
language “language contrary to blanket coverage.” Upon information and belief,
Rimkus’ insurance company clients asked that the new language be included in
the engineering reports. Not surprisingly, Dr. Aiken’s final report included the
language which was memorialized in the Report Conclusions memorandum. Dr.
Aiken believes that the total weight of the evidence will show that USAA was one
of the clients who wanted the “watered-down” language.
As the Complaint and Memorandum indicate, Dr. and Mrs. Aiken are seeking the
following damages:
-4-