A multimillion dollar replica of the biblical boat and the park around it were damaged by storms.
Following the damage of a replica of Noah’s ark and other related attractions, a theme park insurance company is being sued. Ark Encounter is located in Northern Kentucky. It filed a lawsuit regarding coverage for damages to the property following substantial rain.
The insurance company has filed a suit for $1 million in repairs and additional costs.
Ark Encounter filed a lawsuit against its theme park insurance company. It claims to want to recover what it states were $1 million in repairs, in addition to legal costs and fees, and an undisclosed amount of punitive damages.
The media across the country has picked up the story due to the nature of the lawsuit. The irony of an ark replica being damaged by rains has made the story an easy target.
The damage occurred back in 2017, when northern Kentucky experienced substantial rains from consecutive storms (though not nearly 40 days and 40 nights, of course). The National Weather Service data from the time indicated that the year brought the region 40 to 50 inches of rain. Interestingly, that was only slightly above the average for Williamstown, town in which the park is located.
The theme park insurance company lawsuit was filed after land nearby started to fail.
In May 2019, a slope against an access road at the amusement park’s east side started failing. The issue worsened until it resulted in a “significant landslide” which damaged a barrier at the roadside, said the lawsuit.
At that time, the theme park reported the damage in an insurance company claim. The park hired engineers to replace the damaged barrier. The engineers recommended the construction of a retaining wall featuring drilled concrete shafts. This new design was meant to prevent similar damage from recurring. Ark Encounter also repaired and repaved sections of the road, adding grading and improving drainage. The lawsuit stated that these repairs cost about $1 million, said a Washington Post report.
However, the theme park insurance company denied the claims for the improvement. The insurers stated that the policy contained exclusions for faulty workmanship and the cost of correcting deficiencies in original designs.