A Missouri shopping center owner has taken Auto-Owners Insurance to federal court, alleging the insurer grossly underpaid a storm damage claim topping $2 million.
Paddock Equity Investors, LLC, the owner of the Paddock Hills Shopping Center at 1 Paddock Hills Shopping Center, Florissant, Missouri 63033, is suing Auto-Owners Insurance Company (Mutual) in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, Eastern Division. In a complaint filed September 29, 2025, the commercial landlord claims that Auto-Owners mishandled and underpaid a substantial insurance claim after a wind and hail-bearing storm struck the property on or about July 17, 2023.
According to the lawsuit, the storm caused “severe and increasing loss” to the shopping center’s flat roofing systems, asphalt shingle roofing systems, metal flashing, gutters, downspouts, appurtenances, and HVAC units. The property, described as a single-store, concrete masonry unit and multi-wythe brick structure with a combination of TPO, modified bitumen membranes, and three-tab, fiberglass-mat asphalt shingles, was insured by Auto-Owners for direct physical loss caused by wind and hail, subject to all terms, conditions, and exclusions of the policy.
Paddock alleges it notified Auto-Owners of the loss on or about August 22, 2023. Auto-Owners acknowledged the claim, assigned Terrence Dills as the claim adjuster, and designated Claim No. 300-0551909-2023. The insurer initiated inspections through a third-party adjuster, Michael Collins with Catastrophe Specialist, Inc., and later by Todd Koenig, P.E., with Donan Forensic Engineering. Donan’s report, issued December 21, 2023, concluded that approximately 150 shingles on the south-facing mansard-style facades were damaged by recent wind storms, two 8-foot long sections of metal ridge caps and two hip-cap shingles were damaged by wind, and approximately 240 linear feet of metal gutter strips in the breezeway roof decking were damaged by wind. Donan further concluded that the damaged shingles on the south-facing slopes required complete replacement, while other damaged shingles could be spot replaced, and that the metal gutter strips needed full replacement. Donan denied the existence of any hail damage to the roofing systems.
Auto-Owners’ third-party adjuster estimated repairs at $15,722.82, with $5,307.06 withheld for recoverable depreciation, resulting in an actual cash value of $10,415.76. On January 11, 2024, Auto-Owners issued a partial denial letter, stating that the remaining damage was due to pre-existing conditions and wear and tear, and that no payment would be made since the estimate did not exceed the 3% Windstorm/Hail deductible of $123,620.46.
Paddock, disputing the insurer’s findings, retained RestoreMasters, LLC, which provided a competing repair estimate of $2,045,867.60. Paddock also engaged Steven J. Wohlscheid with Wohlscheid Civil Engineering, PLLC, who conducted an inspection and issued a report on March 1, 2024, finding wind damage to the asphalt shingle roofing systems, moisture intrusion underneath the roofing systems with interior moisture damage, hail damage to the TPO and asphalt shingle roofing systems, hail damage to the rooftop HVAC units, and hail and wind damage to the roof parapet and flashing throughout the roofing systems. The Wohlscheid Report concluded that all damaged roofing systems required complete replacement, including replacement of the moisture-impacted underlayment and cap flashing.
Donan issued supplemental reports in April and July 2024, generally agreeing that a significant weather-related event occurred and that damaged shingles and flashings required replacement, and that the rooftop HVAC units displayed hail damage to the metal fins. However, Donan maintained that certain areas, including the TPO roof covering on the Post Office portion of the property and the extent of water intrusion, were outside the scope of their review, and did not perform thermal or moisture measurements.
On January 30, 2025, Donan and HVACi inspected the property. HVACi found that 22 out of 57 HVAC systems sustained hail damage and one sustained damage due to impact from a foreign object, recommending repairs or replacement for 23 systems. Donan’s third supplemental report, issued February 7, 2025, shared these findings but stated that the property’s roof membrane did not sustain any hail or wind damage.
On June 4, 2025, Auto-Owners issued a revised estimate recommending repairs totaling $145,580.80, less $79,326.11 withheld for depreciation, for an actual cash value of $66,254.69.
Paddock’s complaint alleges that Auto-Owners failed to adequately investigate the loss, ignored evidence of hail and wind damage, and delayed payment, forcing the property owner to hire its own professionals and legal counsel. The complaint asserts breach of contract and seeks actual damages in excess of $75,000, interest, costs, and further relief as determined by the court. The complaint also states that Paddock has met all conditions precedent and duties under the policy.
As of the filing date, these are allegations only and not established facts; Auto-Owners has not yet responded to the complaint.
For the insurance industry, the case underscores the ongoing disputes between commercial policyholders and insurers over claim adjustment, the scope of coverage, and the handling of large property losses—issues that remain central to the business of insurance.
