Levi Sumagaysay, CalMatters

Company accused of denying insurance claims from LA fire survivors asks for a rate hike

Rossana Valverde’s Pasadena home of 35 years is still standing after Los Angeles County’s devastating January fires — but more than 100 days later, she and her husband still can’t move back in.

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

That’s because they’re waiting for their insurer, State Farm, to approve and process their claims.

“We were lucky our house made it through,” Valverde said. “At first we thought unscathed. But it definitely still smells like smoke. The windowsills have a thick layer of black ash and soot.”

After getting their home tested for toxins, they discovered it contains high levels of arsenic, lead and nickel. The cleaning, repair and replacement costs for their hardwood floors, carpet, appliances and more total upwards of $300,000, per some written estimates she shared with CalMatters as well as her own estimates of costs to replace things like their bed and upholstered furniture.

So far, she and her husband have received about $40,000 from State Farm but are having trouble getting the insurance company’s adjuster to respond promptly to their requests for more.

She said the company’s adjuster — the second one they were assigned — hardly returns emails and phone calls from her or the public adjuster she’s enlisted for help.

“He pulls this ‘I didn’t receive it’ BS and then when I press him he suddenly finds it,” she said.

She is not alone. There are so many complaints, including a lawsuit, about State Farm delaying or denying claims after the LA-area fires, especially related to smoke damage, that fire survivors, three state lawmakers and others have asked Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara to investigate. They pointed out that the company is awaiting approval for its request to raise its rates on an emergency interim basis and urged Lara to rescind his conditional approval. An administrative law judge is expected to decide on the rate hike soon.

The Insurance Department routinely investigates insurance companies’ response to disasters, which can lead to deeper examinations of their conduct and millions of dollars of additional payments. But this time around, State Farm is facing complaints as it happens to be seeking to raise its rates an average 17% for homeowners.

Under growing pressure to investigate, Lara sent a letter to State Farm Chief Executive Dan Krause last week, asking for details about how the company is handling claims. In the letter seen by CalMatters, Lara asked for a copy of the insurer’s standards for reviewing, investigating and processing smoke damage claims. He also asked State Farm to commit to providing at least 75% of contents coverage without requiring an inventory from fire survivors — the company had raised what it pays out in advance contents coverage from 50% to 65%. The commissioner set a May 9 deadline for a written response from the company.

In an interview, Lara told CalMatters that he also spoke with Krause by phone about the letter. He said he asked Krause if State Farm could maintain a visible, physical presence in the area as customers continue to need help with claims and disaster recovery centers close.

“He’s going to look at keeping a presence in Eaton and Palisades,” Lara said.

When asked whether he planned to tie State Farm’s handling of claims to the company’s request to raise its rates, the commissioner said: “I’m going to see what they respond, then move accordingly.”

Lara said he has to consider that State Farm is California’s biggest insurer, and that it has millions of customers in the state. “I want to be clear to the Legislature,” he said. “I’m balancing all the facts.”

State Sen. Sasha Renee Perez, a Democrat representing Pasadena who co-wrote the letter asking Lara to investigate State Farm and withhold a rate increase, told CalMatters: “Everybody realizes we’re in a home insurance crisis. (Nobody is) saying there should never be a rate increase.” But she said her constituents have been good customers who “feel like they’ve been left in the cold.”

State Farm spokesperson Sevag Sarkissian did not answer questions about Lara’s letter to Krause or his requests of the company. CalMatters also asked about policyholder complaints. Sarkissian sent the following response by email: “We’re here to help our customers recover and we empathize with those who are rebuilding their lives. We've received approximately 12,500 total claims related to the fires and have paid over $3.12 billion to our customers.”

State Farm has said it expects to pay more than $7 billion in claims from the LA-area blazes.

‘A longstanding fight’ about smoke damage

It’s unclear how many State Farm customers are complaining about the company’s handling of claims, especially about smoke damage coverage. The insurance department would not disclose exactly how many such complaints it has fielded, with spokesperson Michael Soller saying only that the complaints are in line with State Farm’s market share in California, which is about 20%. Soller said the complaints are ongoing and that complaint data is posted annually.

But a group of LA-area fire survivors of the Eaton Fire has a website with at least a couple of hundred detailed — though unverified — complaints, which Perez and other lawmakers cited in their letter to Lara.

That doesn’t surprise attorney Amy Bach, the president of San Francisco-based United Policyholders, a national nonprofit organization that advocates for insurance customers. She co-founded the group in 1991, the same year the Oakland Hills fire exposed insurance-coverage problems for survivors.

Bach said smoke damage has been part of “a longstanding fight.” Smoke damage’s effects can seem less obvious than fire damage, and appears to be one of the factors in LA-area fire survivors having trouble with their claims.

She said the more she finds out about the effects of smoke damage, the more she thinks insurers need to better handle related claims.

Bach and her group now advise policyholders to make sure they get their homes tested by an industrial hygienist before cleaning, adding that if their insurer won’t agree to pay for it at first, they should get it done anyway and try to get compensated afterward.

“You have to figure out what you’re dealing with,” she said. “There’s too much at stake: your family’s health, your property value.”

Rossana Valverde, left, and her husband Sam Strgacich, right, examine damage from the Eaton Fire at their home in Pasadena on April 26, 2025. Valverde and Strgacich are working with their home insurance to reach a settlement to cover costs associated with repairing damage caused by smoke from the Eaton Fire earlier this year. Photo by Joel Angel Juarez for CalMatters

A California appeals court ruling in February could affect insurance coverage of soot and ash claims. It held that wildfire debris doesn’t necessarily mean direct physical loss or damage.

Bach was one of several advocates who recently submitted letters in an attempt to depublish — or strike from the record — the decision by the California 2nd District Court of Appeal. She said she doesn’t want insurance companies to be able to point to that court decision as a reason to deny smoke claims.

But last week, the California Supreme Court rejected the depublication requests by Bach and other consumer advocates. They included Consumer Watchdog and Consumer Federation of America, plus an association of public insurance adjusters and a couple of consumer attorneys groups.

The groups that opposed depublication included American Property Casualty Insurance Association and other insurance groups, as well as the FAIR Plan — the fire insurance provider of last resort in California.

Just like State Farm has been accused of delaying claims and payments related to smoke damage, so has the FAIR Plan. LA fire victims sued the FAIR Plan, State Farm and other insurers over smoke damage claims earlier this month.

The FAIR Plan did not immediately return CalMatters’ requests for answers about its policies on smoke damage.

In March, Lara issued a bulletin regarding smoke damage claims. It said insurance companies should not take the February court ruling to mean they are off the hook for such claims.

The commissioner told CalMatters last week that he is working with the governor’s office and public health officials on establishing statewide standards for smoke damage remediation — of cleaning up and stopping environmental damage. Those standards could help inform insurance policy requirements, but spokesperson Soller said the insurance department has no further details to share yet.

A spokesperson for Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office said the commissioner has requested technical support for the effort.

Other fire survivors speak out

In Altadena, Andrew Wessels is also dealing with delays from State Farm. He and his family are now on their seventh temporary home since the fire because the insurer has not approved their request for long-term housing.

They have relied on friends, a hotel and three Airbnbs, for which they pay the rent out of pocket.

They started submitting receipts to State Farm in January, he said. As of now, they have received about $25,000 of $40,000 in reimbursements they have requested.

They have gotten their home tested and found high levels of lead and possibly chlorine gas exposure — not good for him, his wife and their two children, ages 20 months and 5.

They have requested 100% of their Coverage B, or $355,650, because Wessels said their personal goods are a total loss. He asked the company for the money up front, without having to continue submitting receipts.

Wessels said he and his family are "blocked from the ability to rebuild." He joined other Eaton Fire survivors at a press conference last month, where several State Farm policyholders called on the insurance commissioner to reject the company’s request to raise its premiums on an emergency interim basis until it takes care of their claims.

Another survivor, Gail Jamentz, spoke with CalMatters on April 25, sounding discouraged because she said she hadn’t heard from State Farm since February.

“I submitted my claim status Jan. 11,” she said. “I can’t go to FEMA because I don’t have a claim status.”

Photos the survivors group shared with the media show her home is standing but badly burned, with its roof caved in. She needed State Farm to declare it a total loss. She called the inside of her home “toxic soup.”

“There’s no roof, it’s been raining, it’s all mush inside,” Jamentz said.

Thursday, she told the Eaton Fire survivors group on Discord that State Farm had finally agreed to let her claim her home as a total loss.

“I have to give you all credit in helping expedite this process these last few weeks as I really think our press conference helped move things along,” Jamentz wrote.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

'There would have to be a reckoning': CA farmers grapple with impact of Trump tariffs

President Donald Trump’s on-again, off-again tariffs are putting many California businesses, jobs and the state budget at risk. They’re affecting not only long-term relationships with trading partners, but an intricate web of ecosystems and supply chains.

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

The California business owners and groups grappling with the tariffs — wine shop owners, winery founders, farmers — say the precise effects on their industries are unclear so far. They hope there will be an upside.

But for those who have a broad view of trade, things look grim.

The Port of Los Angeles and the Port of Long Beach, the busiest ports in North America, both saw first-quarter increases in imports, but declines in exports, year over year.

Gene Seroka, executive director for the Port of Los Angeles, attributed the higher volume of cargo being moved to “front-loading as a hedge against tariffs” during a recent media briefing. But he said his port saw year-over-year declines in exports for the fourth month in a row, “raising concerns for our (agriculture) and manufacturing partners as counter-tariffs on exports begin to take effect.”

Seroka — who said companies have been telling him they are holding back on hiring and capital investments — predicted a slowdown in cargo movement beginning in May, and expects a 10% drop in volume from July until next year. His predictions are already beginning to show up in the port’s import volume.

Some of that may be due to a decline in Chinese imports. On April 9, Trump raised his tariff on China to 145%, although he later exempted certain electronics, such as laptops and smartphones. China responded on April 12 with 125% tariffs on U.S. products. Chinese goods represent 40% of the imports that pass through the Port of Los Angeles, Seroka said.

A decline in volume will affect port jobs, though he doesn’t anticipate mass layoffs, he said. More than 1.5 million jobs are tied to the two Southern California ports.

The effects of decreased trade will vary for different businesses in the state — even within the same industries.

The California wine industry

A wine merchant in Walnut Creek who sells mostly European wines — on which the president has threatened 200% tariffs — said he’s going to have to make adjustments, like carrying more California wines, or consider closing up shop.

“I’d have to think about whether it’s worthwhile staying in business,” said Igor Ivanov, owner of wine shop Vinous Reverie. He added that the tariff issues are just the latest of the wine industry’s woes, which include the fact that people just aren’t drinking as much alcohol as they used to.

On the other hand, increased tariffs on European wine could help boost California wine.

Natalie Collins, president of the California Association of Winegrape Growers, said tariffs on competing wines could help local wine growers.

Bruce Lundquist, co-founder of Rack & Riddle, which he said is the largest custom producer of sparkling wine in the nation, agreed with Collins: “I wish Americans would look at wines grown in their backyard.”

Lundquist said so far Healdsburg-based Rack & Riddle is OK — the company is stocked up on supplies that he orders from different places, both in and out of the country. But he can’t say what his winery and retail clients might be going through. Lundquist worries about tariff uncertainty dragging on, say through next year. “There would have to be a reckoning if this thing were to go on,” he said. “It’s already hard enough to run a winery.”

What’s at stake as the U.S. wine industry grapples with tariffs: $86 billion in annual sales, U.S. Census Bureau data said. California exported $1.3 billion worth of wine in 2022, per the California Department of Food and Agriculture.

Even if the wine produced in this country stays here, tariffs mean winemakers face higher costs on everything from bottles — glass mostly imported from China — to labels and corks, to metal posts and wooden stakes for the vines. As for U.S. wine exports, 95% of those come from California, says Gino DiCaro, spokesperson for the Wine Institute.

And 35% of exports go to Canada, which now has a serious don’t-buy-American, don’t-go-to-America campaign in effect because of the president’s threats about tariffs and annexing Canada.

“(Canadians) are voting with their feet, and there's a real sense of betrayal and a sense of shock,” said Rana Sarkar, consul general of Canada in San Francisco. “Economic crisis within Canada will no doubt ensue from this, but it will also be deeply painful in the United States.”

California recently became the first state to sue the Trump administration over tariffs. Gov. Gavin Newsom said the tariffs’ trade and geopolitical effects are “outsized,” while Attorney General Rob Bonta said the president bypassed the power of Congress to tax and regulate commerce by declaring a national emergency. California’s lawsuit seeks to pause the tariffs immediately.

But in some cases, the damage is already done. The office of U.S. Rep. Mike Thompson, a Democrat whose district includes Napa’s Wine Country, shared anonymized anecdotes from winery owners and managers, who the congressman’s staff said are afraid to go on the record. Thompson’s constituents say their Canadian business partners have canceled hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of orders, and that potential sales to Mexico or the European Union are on hold. One medium-size winery in St. Helena told Thompson’s staff that since the tariffs Trump imposed during his first term, it has lost 90% of its business with China and is no longer seeking to sell there: “China has turned to other wine regions across the globe and we believe rebuilding this market will take over 20 years.”

In addition, “the uncertainty itself has had damage, even though we (may not) get the tariffs,” said Daniel Sumner, economics professor and director of the University of California Agricultural Issues Center at UC Davis.

California and other producers of agricultural products want to be able to tell customers they’re reliable suppliers, Sumner said. “But you can’t do that if prices can go up. That’s a real problem,” he said.

Sumner added: “A major concern for any industry is the increased likelihood of a global recession and slower growth in general.” Investment banks and economists have said a recession is likely. Citing Trump’s tariffs, the International Monetary Fund has slashed its forecast for U.S. and global economic growth this year.

Farming: Almonds, dairy and other crops

Ryan Talley is vice president of Talley Farms in Arroyo Grande, in San Luis Obispo County, which was started in the 1940s by his grandfather. Now his children are the fourth generation of his family to work for the farm, which grows a few dozen crops.

Talley said his medium-size farm is still able to sell spinach to Canada, but he’s concerned about being able to sell bell peppers to the country, because harvest season for those won’t come until August through November. He hopes the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement will protect those sales — but Trump has threatened tariffs on Canada and Mexico a few times.

Talley Farms’ other crops — including cabbage, kale, lettuce and corn — are distributed domestically but are highly perishable. Talley said that means it’s tough to adjust operations to any tariffs because of changes to fuel, fertilizing or other supply costs.

“We don’t have months to wait something out,” he said. “We have to continue our operations at the intensity that we currently farm.” He added that “we’re going to have to take those rising prices and deal with it the best we can.”

In addition, Talley worries that one possible effect of tariffs is a glut of domestically grown crops. “If the majority of U.S. farms weren't able to export their product, everything would stay here, which would completely flood the market and send prices down,” he said. “It would be great for consumers (in terms of prices) but in the end it would hurt the American farmer.”

But Talley’s biggest concern is his farm’s workers, who could be affected by Trump’s stated intent of mass deportations: “I can withstand an increase in fuel prices and fertilizer prices and regulatory burden to an extent. But if you take away my labor overnight, it would be hard for us.”

It’s almost impossible to find a part of California agriculture unaffected by Trump’s tariffs.

Shawna Morris, executive vice president of trade policy at the National Milk Producers Federation, said she is concerned about California’s dairy exports to Mexico, including cheese. The other really big market for California dairy products is China, which has already “pulled the trigger” on retaliatory tariffs, Morris said. California’s dairy exports totaled $3.2 billion in 2022.

California’s biggest export, almonds, had $4.7 billion in foreign sales in 2022. Their longer shelf life is a plus, said almond farmer Jenny Holtermann, in Kern County. “We harvest once a year, then (our processor partners) sell throughout the year,” she said. “The tariffs won’t affect us instantly.”

Holtermann has experience from the tariffs the president imposed during his first term. She would not share specific numbers for her own farm — which has also been in her family for four generations — but acknowledged those tariffs hurt the almond industry, which is “just now starting to rebound.”

Almond growers saw their prices drop from $2.50 a pound to $1.40 a pound after Trump’s tariffs in 2018, according to research from the University of California Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics.

Holtermann said farmers’ costs have only gone up, so her farm has adjusted by using less fertilizer, buying fewer tractors or letting trucks run a little longer before replacing them.

But she said she thinks the president’s tariffs are part of “a long-game approach… to get our country back to the economic powerhouse we’re supposed to be.”

Besides, Holtermann is counting on a couple of things. One is California almonds’ dominance: The state produces 80% of the world’s almonds, says the Almond Alliance.

The other thing she’s hoping for is another possible federal bailout, which reportedly has been discussed by the Trump administration. During the Trump 1.0 trade war, the federal government provided farmers with “market facilitation funds” of $23 billion to try to offset the business they lost as a result of China’s retaliatory tariffs on the United States, the Government Accountability Office said in a 2021 report.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has not responded to CalMatters’ questions.

Those funds helped her farm last time, Holtermann said, so she’s hoping for more of the same. “I do know he supports agriculture,” she said of the president. “He’s had a lot of meetings with agriculture organizations.”

Still, she expects to take a short-term hit from tariffs this time around, including losing business from certain countries. “I’m not naive,” Holtermann said. “I’m sure we will miss a portion of that market share.”

But Shannon Douglass, president of the California Farm Bureau, is concerned about getting global buyers to return once they switch to other sources. “We know the last round, almonds and pistachios saw a 20% drop in exports,” she said. “Once they have moved it can take a long time to get those markets back.”

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

BRAND NEW STORIES
@2025 - AlterNet Media Inc. All Rights Reserved. - "Poynter" fonts provided by fontsempire.com.