Skwim
Veteran Member
.
"I swear to Jesus this is true: Ark Encounter is suing its insurance providers for not covering — wait for it — rain damage.
Noah thought ahead. But not Ken Ham, apparently.
According to the 13-page lawsuit, Ark Encounter, which opened in 2016, suffered the effects of a heavy rain that began in May of 2017 and continued for several months.
That rain created a landslide which damaged a major access road to the Ark, rendering it “unsafe and unfit for use.” It cost about $1,000,000 for Ark Encounter (and its parent company, Crosswater Canyon) to fix the road. Naturally, they wanted their insurers to pay for it.
But the [five] insurers said no. According to them, their contract with Ark Encounter excluded payments for “correcting design deficiencies or faulty workmanship.” Ark Encounter said that clause didn’t apply because “land improvements” (which is how they classified the road fixes) were an exception to that rule.
The insurers paid for some of the damage that they felt they covered, but that’s it. They don’t want to pay more. Now Ken Ham’s group is suing for the rest.
The Courier Journal already knows you’re laughing about this:
Please comment, Ken. For once, I can’t wait to hear what you have to say.
source
"I swear to Jesus this is true: Ark Encounter is suing its insurance providers for not covering — wait for it — rain damage.
Noah thought ahead. But not Ken Ham, apparently.
According to the 13-page lawsuit, Ark Encounter, which opened in 2016, suffered the effects of a heavy rain that began in May of 2017 and continued for several months.
That rain created a landslide which damaged a major access road to the Ark, rendering it “unsafe and unfit for use.” It cost about $1,000,000 for Ark Encounter (and its parent company, Crosswater Canyon) to fix the road. Naturally, they wanted their insurers to pay for it.
But the [five] insurers said no. According to them, their contract with Ark Encounter excluded payments for “correcting design deficiencies or faulty workmanship.” Ark Encounter said that clause didn’t apply because “land improvements” (which is how they classified the road fixes) were an exception to that rule.
The insurers paid for some of the damage that they felt they covered, but that’s it. They don’t want to pay more. Now Ken Ham’s group is suing for the rest.
The Courier Journal already knows you’re laughing about this:
… to Ark Encounter’s lawyer, Amanda Brooke Stubblefield, at the Cincinnati firm Keating, Muething & Klekamp, the suit is no laughing matter. “We are not going to comment to the press on this case,” she said.
source
So, just desserts or not?
.
Last edited: