Norcold Fire Repair Time

[tstryk]

Those of you that have had fires from a Norcold fridge - how long did the response/repair time take? We are approaching the one month mark since our fire. There was minimal damage, it seems. Mostly to the outside of the coach, and smoke damage to the inside - so it seems like this should not take so long. The insurance company is trying to get a Norcold inspector out to test the unit to find the exact cause. Does any of this sound familiar to those of you having fires?

[Crespro]

tstryk wrote:
Finally got a check today. The estimate for repair was just north of $26,000 - the check was for a little less than $15,000. There was no information on what the check was for and what it did not cover - just the estimate and the check. I was told they would not pay for the fridge because it was the cause of the fire after being told they would not pay for the specific part that caused it - i.e. circuit board or canister. It appears they also are not paying for cleanup, which is quite hefty. Serve-pro, it appears, gave an estimate of $5700. Of course, I opened the envelope a little after 5 on a Friday afternoon. I feel a call to the state insurance commissioner coming on.

Thanks for sharing your story. Hope this recovery will be quick and fully compensate you.

I am not a product liability expert, but there seem to be several principles that are clear.

1. Because it took six weeks for the Norcold rep to inspect the loss, it is likely that there are a large number of claims for Norcold refer fires. It was good judgment to send a very personable rep because if the refer is defective, Norcold is strictly liable.

2. Ten fires due to a manufacturing defect are likely sufficient to produce strict liability under product liability rules. There now must be well over 100 fires due solely to the product defect. I agree that some refer fires may have a different cause, but clearly many Norcold fires are due to the manufacturing defect. Only Norcold knows the actual number of fires resulting from the defect. For legal reasons they will not disclose that number.

3. It is standard legal practice to deny responsibility and then pay all insurance claims to avoid subrogation litigation. Norcold is following a smart legal strategy. All settlements by Norcold will also require the insurance companies to not disclose the number of fires.

4. RV fires can consume the entire vehicle in 20 to 30 minutes. We and Norcold both can thank the Good Lord that there have been no reported wrongful death actions due to this manufacturing defect.

5. Again, I hope you are quickly and fully compensated. Good luck.

Crespro

[tstryk]

ArchHoagland wrote:
Who is your insurance company?

I went through the posts and didn't see their name.

Blue Sky

[ArchHoagland]

Who is your insurance company?

I went through the posts and didn't see their name.

[tstryk]

Finally got a check today. The estimate for repair was just north of $26,000 - the check was for a little less than $15,000. There was no information on what the check was for and what it did not cover - just the estimate and the check. I was told they would not pay for the fridge because it was the cause of the fire after being told they would not pay for the specific part that caused it - i.e. circuit board or canister. It appears they also are not paying for cleanup, which is quite hefty. Serve-pro, it appears, gave an estimate of $5700. Of course, I opened the envelope a little after 5 on a Friday afternoon. I feel a call to the state insurance commissioner coming on.

[tstryk]

Well, the Norcold investigator came out Friday and within 5 minutes of him finishing, I got a call from the insurance company saying I could take it to have it repaired. I have to add - the Norcold investigator was very nice, very personable, and very thorough. What I expected to be difficult was very easy. Let's see how the repairs go now!

[msmith1199]

I knew what you meant, hence the smiley face.

[tstryk]

msmith1199 wrote:

tstryk wrote:

msmith1199 wrote:
No it's not unreasonable

Norcold is coming out March 1.

Since March 1 is over 10 months away I'd be really upset with them! 🙂

OOPS! MAY 1 - sorry! I guess I didn't have enough coffee when I wrote that!

[msmith1199]

tstryk wrote:

msmith1199 wrote:
No it's not unreasonable

Norcold is coming out March 1.

Since March 1 is over 10 months away I'd be really upset with them! 🙂

[tstryk]

msmith1199 wrote:
No it's not unreasonable

Norcold is coming out March 1.

[Mr_Mark1]

Old-Biscuit, Good article.

MM.

[Old-Biscuit]

Anhydrous ammonia is compound formed by the combination of two (2) gaseous elements, nitrogen and hydrogen.

And is classified by DOT as 'non-flammable'

But the hydrogen used in the absorption refrigerant IS highly flammable.

One reason Atwood switched to 'helium' vs hydrogen in their newer model fridges.


BUT------lot of RV fires are 'blamed' on fridges.

HERE is a good article about RV Fires

[slickest1]

I almost had a fridge fire but it was not Norcold's fault. When I had the recall done they found there was no flue installed up to the vent on the roof. All the wood right up to the top is charred black. I had the recall done just after I bought it and it was 8 years old. I would say it was a coach manufacturer oversite. If it would have burned it would have been blamed on Norcold.

[msmith1199]

No it's not unreasonable, that's why I said call. I'm a former insurance adjuster myself and part of our job was to gather evidence if it was somebody else's fault. For example I once had a house fire that started in the chimney. We had the demo crew pull the back wall off and when we did it was obvious the exhaust pipe for the fireplace was not installed correctly and that's what started the fire. That meant blame was going to be back on the Contractor so we needed to give them a chance to come see it. In this case it only took a few hours them to get somebody out there to look at it. Then the company I worked for approved the work and repaired the house and then they got their money back from the contractor's insurance company. That is all that is happening here. But they need to pressure the Norcold people to come look at it.

[tstryk]

msmith1199 wrote:

They likely want to giver Norcold the chance to inspect it before repairs are started. And that is reasonable given that your insurance company is going to try and subrogate against Norcold, and if Norcold doesn't have a chance to look at, they just say it's not their fault.

I understand that, but I pay premiums to cover me for things like this, be it Norcold's fault, my fault, or whoever's fault and I just want it fixed and back where it was before this happened in a timely manner. Is that unreasonable to expect?