A Blanchard, Oklahoma, family displaced by a tornado nearly three years ago is suing their insurance provider, alleging a systematic effort to undervalue their claim. The lawsuit, filed against Encompass Insurance Company, a wholly-owned subsidiary of The Allstate Corporation, centers on accusations that the company pressured independent adjusters to alter damage assessments and reduce payouts to policyholders.
On the evening of April 19, 2023, a tornado with 130-mile-per-hour winds ripped through Blanchard, devastating the home of Jacob and Mallory Woodard. Mallory, who was pregnant at the time, and their young daughter sheltered in a bathroom as the storm tore off the roof, allowing rain to flood the interior and causing extensive structural damage. Jacob Woodard arrived home to discover his family safe but their house largely destroyed.
Nearly three years later, the Woodards remain displaced, living in a shop on their property that provides less than half the space of their former home. Their claim with Encompass remains disputed, despite ongoing mortgage payments on a property they cannot inhabit. The family filed suit in April 2024, alleging lousy faith practices by the insurer.
Jeff Marr and his son Nick Marr, of the Oklahoma City-based Marr Law Firm, represent the Woodards. They contend the case reveals a “systematic scheme” within Allstate to manipulate claim assessments. “This isn’t about just one family,” Jeff Marr stated. “This is about a pattern of behavior that’s been the subject of investigation at the highest levels.”
The Woodards’ initial policy, according to the lawsuit, included replacement cost coverage, assuring full replacement of their property in the event of a total loss. Following the storm, the couple immediately contacted their agent as emergency sirens sounded. However, the subsequent months were marked by delays, denials, and disagreements over assessments submitted by their contractors.
Encompass utilized third-party adjusters, including Russ Mackey of Pilot, to evaluate the damage. Mackey, according to court filings, expressed concerns about his qualifications to assess the severity of the structural damage and recommended an engineering review. A subsequent report from Donan Engineering confirmed significant structural damage. However, the Woodards allege Encompass requested the engineer add information detailing potential repairs, rather than a complete replacement.
The Woodards’ contractor, Dawk-5 Contracting, estimated the cost of a complete rebuild at $252,500. This assessment was supported by a report from Chris Ramsayer, a structural engineering advisor with the University of Oklahoma. “It is my professional opinion that the cost to repair the home and return it to the condition prior to the tornado exceeds the cost to totally replace the structure,” Ramsayer wrote in his report.
Despite these assessments, Encompass insisted on a third inspection. Jacob Woodard agreed, but only after receiving assurances from an Allstate manager that the inspector would not be influenced by the company to downplay the damage. Quinton Hughes, a general contractor with Jenkins Restorations, was dispatched by Encompass. Recordings of the interaction between Hughes and Woodard, reviewed by The Oklahoman, reveal Hughes’ initial assessment aligned with the need for a complete rebuild.
“My opinion is, dude, you need a new house, man,” Hughes said in the recorded conversation. However, Hughes also expressed concern about potential repercussions for providing that assessment. “They’ll be like, ‘No, the engineering report says it doesn’t need to be knocked down and rebuilt,’” Hughes told Woodard, adding that he would be compelled to align his report with the company’s preferred outcome. “I’d be like, ‘Ok, well, I have to write it for that because I’m on (Encompass’) program.’”
The final estimate provided by Allstate did not include a full rebuild. Depositions revealed that Encompass did not review or refute Ramsayer’s engineering report.
At a hearing before District Judge Michael Tupper in Cleveland County on Tuesday, Nick Marr presented evidence of the alleged manipulation. He played the recording of Hughes’ conversation with Woodard, arguing, “Your honor, Allstate lied to these folks. (Allstate) told them they would go off of the opinion of this objective third party, and then they made that third party change his mind so they could pay out less.”
Marr connected the Woodard case to a 2025 congressional subcommittee hearing led by U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), where Allstate was accused of a company-wide pattern of misconduct to maximize profits. Marr argued this federal scrutiny demonstrates the alleged pressure on adjusters is not an isolated incident. He referenced Hawley’s statement during the hearing: “And they adjust the (award arbitrarily) down, down, down. And the policyholder never knows. And the policyholder gets no say in the process.”
Marr presented a deposition from Sheila Eckhoff, a representative of Encompass, in which she acknowledged the accuracy of Hawley’s characterization of the company’s strategy.
The plaintiffs are seeking access to internal Allstate documents related to claim adjustment practices over the past five years, citing the case of Reibert v. CSAA Fire & Casualty Insurance Company, which established the discoverability of information relevant to a pattern of bad faith conduct. Marr specifically requested analyses conducted by Allstate regarding reductions in indemnity payments on homeowners’ claims. Allstate did not dispute the existence of such documents. Mike Fiato, executive vice president and chief claims officer for Allstate, testified in the congressional subcommittee hearing that company data shows estimates are reduced approximately 27% of the time.
Jasper Abbott, representing Encompass, argued the request for discovery was overly broad and burdensome. Judge Tupper, however, ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, stating they had presented “pretty persuasive evidence” of potential manipulation of vendor estimates. He ordered Allstate to produce documents, including policies, procedures, directives, training materials, and data reports, related to vendor estimate modification practices for the five-year period preceding the 2023 loss.
The deadline for document production is March 24. Marr stated he intends to depose Fiato and expects to meet with Sen. Hawley to discuss the case. He indicated his clients are prepared to proceed to trial.
