Filing Number: 797609
|
| Filing Accepted: 12/19/2024 |
| Last/Business Name
*
|
|
|
GERGES
|
|
First Name |
|
AIHAB AND JENNIFER |
|
| Street Address
*
|
|
2610 NIGHT RAINS DR. |
| City, State Zip
*
|
|
LUTZ,
FL
33559
|
| Email Address
*
|
|
STEVEN@CROSKEYLAW.ORG |
| Complainant Type:
*
|
|
Insured |
|
| Last/Business Name* |
|
GERGES |
|
First Name |
|
AIHAB AND JENNIFER |
| Policy # * |
|
OIC30026491-05 |
|
Claim #* |
|
24FLHOV0014466 |
|
Attorney is Applicable
|
| Last Name* |
CROSKEY
First Name *
STEVEN
Initial
M
|
| Street Address* |
|
1644 BLANDING BLVD. |
| City, State Zip* |
|
JACKSONVILLE
,
FLORIDA
32210
|
| Email Address * |
|
STEVEN@CROSKEYLAW.ORG |
|
|
| Insurer Type
*
|
|
Authorized Insurer
Unauthorized Insurer
|
|
|
| Insurer Name |
|
|
| Insurer Name* |
|
OLYMPUS INSURANCE COMPANY
|
| Insurer Name* |
|
|
| Street Address* |
|
|
| City, State Zip* |
|
,
|
|
NAIC Company Code 12954 |
|
|
| Name of individual responsible for violation (if any):*
DARIUS NORFLEET
|
| Type of Insurance
*
Residential Property & Casualty
|
|
|
| Reason for Notice
*
|
|
Claim Denial
|
|
Claim Delay
|
|
Unsatisfactory Settlement Offer
|
|
Unfair Trade Practice
|
|
|
*
Statutory provision(s) which the insurer allegedly violated.
|
|
|
| 624.155(1)(b)(1) |
|
Not attempting in good faith to settle claims when, under all the circumstances, it could and should have done so, had it acted fairly and honestly toward its insured and with due regard for her or his interests.
|
| 624.155(1)(b)(3) |
|
Except as to liability coverages, failing to promptly settle claims, when the obligation to settle a claim has become reasonably clear, under one portion of the insurance policy coverage in order to influence settlements under other portions of the insurance policy coverage.
|
| 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(a) |
|
Failing to adopt and implement standards for the proper investigation of claims.
|
| 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(b) |
|
Misrepresenting pertinent facts or insurance policy provisions relating to coverages at issue.
|
| 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(c) |
|
Failing to acknowledge and act promptly upon communications with respect to claims.
|
| 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(d) |
|
Denying claims without conducting reasonable investigations based upon available information.
|
| 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(f) |
|
Failing to promptly provide a reasonable explanation in writing to the insured of the basis in the insurance policy, in relation to the facts or applicable law, for denial of a claim or for the offer of a compromise settlement.
|
| 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(g) |
|
Failing to promptly notify the insured of any additional information necessary for the processing of a claim.
|
| 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(h) |
|
Failing to clearly explain the nature of the requested information and the reasons why such information is necessary.
|
|
*
Specific policy language that is relevant to the violation.
Enter all words or phrases (one at a time) that should be used to filter.
Coverage A – Dwelling: Insurer is required to cover damage incurred by an insured event to the Insured’s dwelling. Insurer is required to cover damage that Insured has claim coverage for.
|
| |
*
Facts and circumstances giving rise to the violation.
Enter all words or phrases (one at a time) that should be used to filter.
On or about January 9, 2024, Claimants suffered loss to their Insured Property as a result of a windstorm. The Claimant reported same loss to the Insurer subsequently thereafter, and the Insurer had the insured Property inspected. The Insurer created an estimate, but the Insurer undervalued and denied parts of the claim. Additionally, despite Claimant’s roofing company, public adjuster, and engineer indicating that there is clear wind damage to the roof and covered interior water damage and mold damage from wind driven rain, the Insurer has failed or refused to acknowledge same damage. As a result, Claimant asserts that the Insurer is attempting to undermine the scope of repairs and damage to the Insured Property identified by the Claimant. Moreover, the Insurer is failing or refusing to pay for a replacement of the roof despite the circumstances indicating that more than 25% of the total roof area or roof section of the Property needs to be repaired, replaced or recovered, all within a 12-month period.
The Insurer hired SDII Global to perform an inspection of the roof, and SDII found no storm related damages to the roof despite the storm producing 71 mph wind speeds at or around the property on the date of loss, which was included in their report. Furthermore, the inspector for SDII, who was hired by the Insurer, broke 5 roofing tiles in different areas and elevations of the roof during his inspection, and the Insurer has yet to remedy this issue, despite being first made aware of it by the public adjuster on July 12, 2024.
Furthermore, Claimants hired Engage Mold Solutions to perform mold testing and provide a mold assessment report. Upon the discovery of mold, which was left out of the Insurer’s estimate, a copy was provided to the Insurer and a request was made to have the Insurer reinspect the damaged property to test for mold. That inspection occurred on September 19, 2024. To date, the Insurer has not provided any updated information or results of their vendor’s testing, leaving the Claimants unaware of the Insurer’s position from their vendor regarding necessary mold remediation.
Claimant asserts that all of these things taken into consideration, along with everything described below, and also each one individually, the Insurer acting in bad faith and not fairly towards the Claimant based off of the circumstances. In Florida, the work of adjusting insurance claims engages the public trust. The Insurer breached this duty in the adjustment of this claim, by failing to apply the insurance policy language to its coverage analysis by, inter alia, unreasonably underpaying a claim with knowledge of higher costs being required to restore the property to its pre-loss condition. Accordingly, the Insurer’s conduct as described herein was inappropriate. Furthermore, by failing to justify any of Insurer’s actions and omissions with policy language, the Insurer is actively misrepresenting a fact material to Insured’s claim, materially misrepresenting the policy, prejudicially investigating the claim, and wrongfully denying and/or limiting coverage based upon these misrepresentations. Specifically, the Insurer knew or had cause to know the proposed scope of repairs were insufficient to restore the property to its pre-loss condition; thus the Insurer (1) failed to act in good faith and due diligence to resolve claims; (2) placed the Insurer’s financial interest before that of the Insureds; (3) unfairly looked for ways to reduce Insured’s recovery; (4) failed to adjust the claim to restore the property to its pre-loss condition; (5) misrepresented the insurance policy provision(s) to the Insured; (6) failed to create and implement adequate guidelines for proper investigation of claims handling and for training and supervision of employees resulting in statutory violations as set forth herein; (7) failed to acknowledge or respond to in accordance with Florida law correspondence from the Insured to the Insurer regarding this claim and requesting a certified copy of the applicable policy; and (8) failed to correct its mistake(s) prior to entry of this civil remedy. These actions and omissions are all inherently deceptive and unfair to any person insured by them. Insurer’s misconduct needlessly increasing the likelihood of continued damage to the Insured Property.
NOTICE: This notice is given in order to perfect the right to pursue the civil remedy authorized by this section. It appears Insurer has a pattern of violating, at the very least, Florida Statute 624.155(1)(b)(1) and also 627.70131(5)(a), 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(c) and 627.70131(1)(a). Undersigned Counsel is aware of numerous other claims where Insurer failed to act in good faith in resolving residential property and casualty insurance claims. Many of these instances are recorded in the Civil Remedy Notice database which indicates these are general business practices for the Insurer.
The Insurer’s refusal to properly and timely adjust this claim will continue increasing those costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. Insurer’s wrongful conduct and omissions include, but are not limited to those identified above and the following: (1) claim delay; (2) not conducting full and prompt investigation; (3) not treating the Insured with good faith claims conduct; (4) looking for ways to deny, reduce, or delay recovery to Insured; (5) holding back and failing to pay the claim, clearly owed; (6) not adjusting the claim and evaluating the loss property promptly and fairly to provide full and prompt indemnity to the Insured; (7) failing to implement proper standards for the adjustment and investigation of claims; (8) placing the company’s interests before the policyholder’s interests. Failure to cure all defects during the 60-day safe harbor period may result in additional extra-contractual damages.
|
|
*
|
The submitter hereby states that this notice is given in order to perfect the rights of the
person(s) damaged to pursue civil remedies authorized by Section 624.155, Florida Statutes.
Before submitting a Notice using this system, please verify that all text has been entered
correctly and completely. Once the Notice has been submitted, the text cannot be changed
or deleted.
|
DFS-10-363
Rev. 10/14/2008
|