How to Protect Your Assets: The Law and Insurance Claims After Natural Disasters

February 26, 2024

How to Protect Your Assets: The Law and Insurance Claims After Natural Disasters

Natural disasters can wreak havoc and cause massive loss of life and damage to property. However, even if you escape the physical dangers of a natural disaster, it does not mean that your assets are safe. In fact, natural disasters can lead to a host of legal and insurance issues that could end up costing you more money. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the legal and insurance claims processes after a natural disaster to protect your assets. In this blog, we will explore the steps you need to take to safeguard your assets and ensure that you receive adequate compensation in the event of a natural disaster.


1. Understand Your Insurance Coverage


The first step to protecting your assets after a natural disaster is to understand the coverage provided by your insurance policy. Double-check that your policy includes coverage for natural disasters such as earthquakes, flooding, hurricanes, and tornadoes, among others. Ensure that you have sufficient coverage to include all of your assets.


2. Document Your Losses


If a natural disaster strikes, document all of your losses as soon as possible, both visually and in writing. Take pictures or videos of all the damage to your property and make a list of any damaged or destroyed items. You must notify your insurance company of any losses as soon as possible to help streamline the claims process.


3. Gather Evidence


Your insurance company may require some proof of loss or damage to property before accepting an insurance claim. Keep the receipts of all repairs and purchases made after the natural disaster. These receipts will help your insurer to assess the value of any claims you make. In addition, save all emails, letters, and phone messages between yourself and your insurance agency or adjustor.


4. Understand the Legal Implications


If your insurance coverage is insufficient, you may need to initiate legal proceedings. In that case, you will be required to prove that the natural disaster occurred and that the damage was caused by the natural disaster. You will also need to provide evidence that your insurance policy does not fully cover your losses. It is essential to seek legal advice as soon as possible and understand the timelines and procedures required for your case.


5. Take Preventive Measures


Finally, it is always best to take preventive measures to protect yourself from the impact of natural disasters. For example, secure your property with shuttered windows, reinforced doors, and a backup generator. Moreover, make sure that your insurance policies are up to date and that they cover all potential risks.


Natural disasters can cause significant economic losses, and there is no way to predict when and where they will happen. Therefore, to protect your assets, you need to have a plan in place both for seeking compensation through insurance claims and for taking legal action if appropriate. It is best to seek legal advice early in the claims process, keep detailed documentation of any losses, and communicate effectively with your insurer. Remember, the best way to protect your assets is to take preventive measures and have a robust plan in place. Need help with your insurance claim?
Reach out to us today for a free consultation!


Contact Us

By submitting this form you agree to receive text messages.

By Rebecca Rivera December 9, 2025
As reported in the Washington Post December 5th, 2025 by Amudalat Ajasa A prominent scientific journal, Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, has retracted a widely cited 2000 study that previously concluded the active ingredient in Roundup, glyphosate, posed no cancer risk to humans. The retraction was initiated after evidence emerged suggesting the study was heavily influenced by the herbicide's seller, Monsanto (now owned by Bayer), in an apparent effort to disguise potential health risks. Specific concerns cited by the journal include the strong possibility that Monsanto employees contributed to the writing without proper acknowledgment, that the authors may have received undisclosed payments from the company , and that the findings were based solely on unpublished Monsanto studies. This misconduct, discovered through internal company emails during federal litigation, is significant because the faulty research served as a bedrock for regulatory decisions regarding glyphosate for decades. Summary of Alleged Faulty Study and Monsanto's Influence The Study and Its Conclusion: The retracted paper, published in 2000, was a "bedrock study" that concluded: "under present and expected conditions of new use, there is no potential for Roundup herbicide to pose a health risk to humans." The Retraction: The scientific journal retracted the study due to a loss of confidence in its results and conclusions, citing the need to "maintain the integrity of the journal." Evidence of Undisclosed Influence: The co-editor in chief cited evidence suggesting that Monsanto employees "may have contributed to the writing of the article without proper acknowledgment as co authors." Undisclosed Payments: The retraction also noted that the study's authors may have been paid by Monsanto without disclosing it . Basis of Findings: The journal stated that the study's findings about cancer risk were "solely based on unpublished studies from Monsanto." Discovery of Influence: Monsanto's influence over the study was reportedly discovered through internal emails released during federal litigation against the company in 2017. Impact: The study "had a significant impact on regulatory decision-making regarding glyphosate and Roundup for decades," and was one of the most-cited papers on glyphosate safety, underpinning federal regulations for the pesticide. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) even cited it in its 2016 review of glyphosate. Context and Aftermath Bayer's Defense: Bayer (which acquired Monsanto in 2018) defended the chemical's safety and argued that Monsanto's involvement was appropriately cited in the acknowledgments, stating that glyphosate is the most extensively studied herbicide and that the "vast majority of published studies on glyphosate had no Monsanto involvement." Regulatory Stance: The EPA stated the retraction would not affect its current stance —which is that glyphosate is "not likely to be carcinogenic to humans"—because the agency does not directly rely on review articles like this one, but uses them to find other relevant individual studies. Litigation: Bayer has spent approximately $10 billion to settle lawsuits arguing the company did not warn customers about the negative health impacts of using Roundup. Read the full article in the Washington Post
By Rebecca Rivera November 14, 2025
In this series premiere episode, Founder & President of SOSCSA, Child Sexual Abuse Survivor & BSA Bankruptcy Claimant, Curtis Garrison interviews attorney Jason J Joy for an update on the BSA bankruptcy and discussing childhood abuse litigation for which Jason is an outspoken and experienced advocate. Jason's firm is actively litigating cases for many clients his law firm represents. This podcast is recommended for clients already represented, and for those who are still contemplating coming forward to establish a claim. Topics covered in this episode: Recent BSA Bankruptcy Trust report Lajun Claimants (Guam) v. Boy Scouts of America and their recent Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court The 1.5% initial payment, possible second payment time / total percentage Future Claims, BSA Councils, BSA Charters (churches, schools, etc) which there are over 100,000 entities possibly getting free of liability Mixed Claims explained We did not vote for this plan, they promised we would be paid in “Paid in Full” Plans to file an Amicus Brief Statute of Limitations 
By Rebecca Rivera November 6, 2025
The Boy Scouts of America bankruptcy case, involving tens of thousands of survivors of childhood sexual abuse, is among the largest and most contentious mass tort proceedings in U.S. history. In this podcast, Attorney Jason Joy breaks down the latest ruling from the Third Circuit Court, which leaves many survivors of childhood sexual abuse with drastically underfunded compensation.