The appellants argue that the trial judge erred in finding that they were late in reporting their claim for loss to Pembridge and was, therefore, disentitled to coverage under their homeowners’ insurance policy.
There was conflicting evidence as to when the appellants informed Pembridge of their claim. In our view, it was open to the trial judge to accept the evidence of Mr. Groff that the appellants did not report the claim until December 12, 2002 – over four months after the water damage incident.