Mitigation Expenses Coverage

We would like to address a question that comes up continually with insurance companies. On landscaping and coverage B items, some adjusters interpret the policy as paying for items damaged only as a direct loss from the fire or covered peril. However the policy also states that it is the insured's responsibility to mitigate further damage. In that respect if there is landscaping, fencing, brick walkways, etc. that would be damaged in the demolition of the property and in order to prevent that damage the insured must move said items, should that cost not be covered? If they do not cover the cost to move and protect and replace these items and they are damaged due to consequences surrounding the covered peril, should the insurance cover the cost to replace? It is our position that one or the other should be covered, either the cost to move, protect and put back or the cost to replace.

Indiana Subscriber