Charles and Darlene Nelson didn't think a lot about their homeowners' insurance policy after they moved into the modest home they built in 1990 to enjoy their retirement.
But in 2009, Charles took a closer look at his policy statement and realized they were paying too much.
American Family Mutual Insurance Co., the state's second-largest homeowners insurer, had increased the cost to replace their Wright County home from $184,000 in 2004 to more than $400,000. By 2011, it was $454,500, with another $363,000 for the contents.
"What got my dander up was the doggone contents," Charles Nelson said. "I don't know anybody that has $360,000 of personal property in their house."
Given American Family's size, the Nelsons suspect there are other Minnesota customers who have run into the same issue they allege.
Their case offers a window on a critical but somewhat mysterious part of the property insurance industry: the methodology companies use to establish the replacement costs for dwellings and contents for new policies and renewals. Particularly worrisome, according to consumer advocates, is the widespread use of third-party vendors to help establish the replacement value of homes.
"I think there's a temptation on the part of the vendors to beat out competitors by being able to tell insurance companies you'll make more money if you use my product," said J. Robert Hunter, director of insurance for the Consumer Federation of America and a former Texas insurance commissioner.
The Nelsons filed a lawsuit Thursday, arguing that American Family's methodology for determining policy values is flawed. They're seeking class-action status.