Civil Remedy Notice of Insurer Violations
Login

Filing Number:     801974
Filing Accepted:  1/17/2025
         Print Filing
Complainant
Last/Business Name *  
DPL INVESTMENTS CORP.   First Name  
Street Address * 528 S. POLK DR.
City, State Zip * SARASOTA, FL 34236
Email Address * LIDOINNKEEPER@GMAIL.COM
Complainant Type: * Insured
Insured
Last/Business Name*   DPL INVESTMENTS CORP.   First Name  
Policy # * AMAA0013920 Claim #* AMW02604
Attorney
Attorney is Applicable
Last Name* FANTETTI First Name * KELLY Initial A
Street Address* 109 S. EDISON AVENUE
City, State Zip* TAMPA , FLORIDA 33606
Email Address * KFANTETTI@STOCKHAMLAWGROUP.COM
Violation
Insurer Type *   Authorized Insurer Unauthorized Insurer
 
Insurer Name*   UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S, LONDON
NAIC Company Code
 
Name of individual responsible for violation (if any):* TIFFANY BATES
Type of Insurance * Commercial Property & Casualty   
Reason for Notice *
Unsatisfactory Settlement Offer
Claim Denial
Claim Delay
Unfair Trade Practice
Other : Insufficient Investigation
* 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.
626.9541(1)(i)(3)(a) Failing to adopt and implement standards for the proper investigation of claims.
626.9541(1)(i)(3)(d) Denying claims without conducting reasonable investigations based upon available information.
* Specific policy language that is relevant to the violation.
Enter all words or phrases (one at a time) that should be used to filter.

4. Loss Payment a. In the event of loss or damage covered by this Coverage Form, at our option, we will either: (1) Pay the value of lost or damaged property; (2)Pay the cost of repairing or replacing the lost or damaged property, subject to b. below; (3) Take all or any part of the property at an agreed or appraised value; or (4) Repair, rebuild or replace the property with other property of like kind and quality subject to b. below. A. Covered Causes of Loss When Special is shown in the Declarations, Covered Causes of Loss means direct physical loss unless the loss is excluded or limited in this policy.
 
* Facts and circumstances giving rise to the violation.
Enter all words or phrases (one at a time) that should be used to filter.

In Florida, the work of adjusting insurance claims engages the public trust. Certain Underwriters at Lloyds London (“LLOYDS”) has breached the public’s trust by its adjustment of DPL Investments Corp’s (“INSURED”) claim of loss. LLOYDS’ address is 280 Park Avenue, East Tower, 25th Floor, New York, NY 10017. LLOYDS has failed to create and implement adequate guidelines for the proper investigation and evaluation of claims, claims handling, and for training and supervision of employees resulting in statutory violations as set forth above. LLOYDS has failed and/or refused to thoroughly, accurately, and completely investigate and evaluate the INSURED’S insurance claim for damages. LLOYDS has failed to promptly settle the INSURED’S insurance claim when the obligation to settle the insurance claim had become reasonably clear. To date, notwithstanding the INSURED’S pleas otherwise, LLOYDS has continued to refuse to acknowledge its obligation to conduct a proper investigation, and to tender the full amount of insurance monies due and owing its INSURED under the policy. Rather, LLOYDS has denied the claim without conducting a reasonable investigation of the available information. This claim involves the INSURED’S property located at 528 S. Polk Dr., Sarasota, FL 34236, which sustained significant damage from a sudden and accidental plumbing leak on or around December 3, 2023. LLOYDS denied the claim, wrongfully asserting that it was a long-term leak, based on the INSURED having high water bills in March 2023 and September 2023. However, the INSURED did not, in fact, have high water bills in either of those two months. The Insured’s water bill peaked in June 2023 ($3,893.42). The INSURED did have prior leaks at that time. Sleuth Leak Detection was called out, and they tested the whole system and identified the leaks, which were repaired. The water bills then progressively dropped in July ($2,743.00) and August ($868.56). In September, the bill went back up to $1,806.92. This is a normal rate for the INSURED, as the Inn typically sees an end of summer spike in travel through Labor Day; however, in early October, an additional leak was discovered. Sleuth tested the system again, identified the isolated leak, and the INSURED repaired the leak. The October water bill then went back down to $812.41. The November water bill increased to $1,898.30, as this is the time of the year that the INSURED does extensive laundry, including washing all of the window treatments, blankets, and bedding, as well as cleaning all upholstery. Then, the subject loss happened during the December water bill which was $2,078.72. The INSURED has advised that with the exception of the June water bill, the water bills are typical for her building, which has 12 units, wherein people are taking showers and they are doing laundry every day. She advised that she almost never has a water bill below $750, and water bills closer to $2,000 are the norm. On the date of the loss, December 3, 2023, the owner of the Inn, Patricia Hamm, was contacted by her housekeeper at the time, Maria Gonzalez. Ms. Gonzalez goes into the rooms daily, and she discovered the extensive water loss when she approached unit 2A and saw a stream of water coming out the front door of the unit. Upon entering the room, Ms. Gonzalez could see water coming up from underneath the flooring near the front door, and between the toilet and the vanity in the bathroom. Ms. Gonzalez made Ms. Hamm aware of a leak, but did not fully convey the severity of the issue. Shortly thereafter, Ms. Hamm then received a call from a painter who had been working at the property painting the interior of the units for several weeks prior to the loss. The painter, Oscar Pineda, reported to Ms. Hamm that there was a significant amount of water coming from the unit, and that he had been sucking the water up with a shop vacuum while Ms. Gonzalez had been attempting to sweep it out the front door and into the parking area with a broom. When Ms. Hamm arrived at the property, she was unable to find the source of the water and had to shut off the water to the entire property. There were two tenants staying at the Inn at that time, and they had to vacate the property. Ms. Hamm again called Sleuth Leak Detection, and they identified pressurized leaks in four different feed lines, including both upstairs and downstairs, and asserted that there had essentially been a catastrophic failure of the entire plumbing system. The layout of this Inn is that there are 3 units upstairs, and 3 downstairs; however, each unit can be rented as one big apartment-type unit, or split into two smaller hotel-type units. So, each unit has an “a” side and a “b” side. On the bottom, 1a/b is on the left, 2 a/b in the middle, and 3 a/b on the right. On the top, 4 a/b is on the left, 5 a/b is in the middle, and 6 a/b is on the right. The water was first discovered in unit 2a, but when Sleuth came out, they identified leaks to the pressurized lines in 1 a/b, 2 a/b, 3 a/b, and 4 a/b. The INSURED was told that the leak in 4 a/b, which is upstairs was actually the worst, and it was running down the left side of the building. The INSURED has conducted a temporary repair to the plumbing, which consisted of re-routing the existing lines to the outside of the building. However, this repair is insufficient, both because it is an eyesore and because it leaves the plumbing exposed to extreme weather events. Although the policy does not pay for plumbing repairs, it does pay for ensuing loss and access. Nevertheless, LLOYDS denied this claim in total. In early November 2024, counsel for the INSURED and adjuster Tiffany Bates engaged in several detailed emails and phone conversations about the facts of the claim and the sudden nature of the loss. Thereafter, Underwriters delayed the claim for two additional months before notifying the INSURED on January 6, 2025, that it was standing on its original denial, despite all of the additional information provided. The concept of insurance is that the insurer will investigate and grant timely and prompt indemnity or security against a contingent loss. Florida Statute §624.02 defines “insurance” as a contract whereby one undertakes to indemnify another or pay or allow a specified amount or a determinable benefit upon determinable contingencies. Inherent in that definition is the fact that payment must be made timely and promptly so that the INSURED may mitigate its damages and be put back into the position it was in prior to the loss as quickly as possible. LLOYDS has breached this duty. The INSURED was, and still is, forced to expend out of pocket monies to submit its insurance claim, e.g., retaining an attorney and other experts to force LLOYDS to honor its obligations under the insurance policy and to pay all the insurance proceeds due and owing to it. LLOYDS has refused and/or failed to tender all the insurance proceeds due and owing to the INSURED. LLOYDS’ refusal and/or failure to settle the insurance claim when under all circumstances it could have and should have done so had it acted fairly and honestly towards the INSURED is wrongful conduct. Furthermore, the INSURED contends that LLOYDS’ adjusters and/or representatives financially benefit from such wrongful conduct. To cure the defects outlined above, the LLOYDS must: (1) promptly tender all insurance proceeds due and owing to the INSURED that would reasonably place the INSURED back into the pre-loss condition, including the tender of accrued interest due and owing to the INSURED; (2) promptly and timely communicate with the INSURED’s representative(s) to complete the adjustment of the INSURED’s loss by participating in good faith negotiations to reach an agreement relating to the parties’ dispute over coverage, scope and amount. This notice is given in order to perfect the right to pursue the civil remedy authorized by Fla. Stat. §624.155.
Comments
User Id Date Added Comment
kfantetti@stockhamlawgroup.com 06-13-2025 Insured is withdrawing Civil Remedy Notice filed on January 17, 2025 with filing number of 801974.
catriana.messina@phelps.com 03-18-2025 To Whom It May Concern: We write on behalf of Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London Subscribing to Policy No. AMAA0013920 (“Underwriters”), the commercial property insurers for DPL Investments Corp (the “Insured”) under Policy Number AMAA0013920, with effective dates of May 2, 2023, to May 2, 2024 (the “Policy”). We write on Underwriters’ behalf in response to the Civil Remedy Notice of Insurer Violations (“the Notice”) submitted to the Department of Financial Services, Division of Consumer Services (“the Department”) by Kelly Fantetti, Esq. on behalf of the Insured. The Notice bears filing number 801974, with an acceptance date of January 17, 2025. In the Notice, Ms. Fantetti, on behalf of the Insured, alleges that Underwriters violated three sections of the Florida Statutes with regard to the Insured’s claim under the Policy for alleged damage to the insured commercial property located at 528 S. Polk Dr, Sarasota, FL 34236 (the “Property”), which reportedly occurred on December 3, 2023 (the “Loss”). The Notice generally alleges that the “Reasons for Notice” are “Unsatisfactory Settlement Offer,” “Claim Denial,” “Claim Delay,” “Unfair Trade Practice,” and “Insufficient Investigation.” Underwriters categorically deny that they or any of their representatives engaged in any prohibited conduct or violated any of the statutes referenced in the Notice with respect to this claim. The Notice is vague and deficient in describing the facts and circumstances and applicable provisions of the Policy giving rise to Underwriters alleged statutory violations. The Notice is also deficient because it fails to state with specificity what Underwriters must do to “cure” the alleged violations as required by Florida law. Additionally, the Notice is invalid for its failure to specifically allege the Policy provisions in accordance with the requirements of section 624.155(3)(b)(4), Florida Statutes. Despite the deficiencies in the Notice, Underwriters acted in good faith, without delay, and with due regard for the Insured’s interests at all times during the investigation, handling, and adjustment of the Insured’s claim, to resolve the dispute pursuant to the terms of the Policy. A detailed response to the Notice, including discussion of deficiencies in the Notice and Underwriters’ good faith attempts to “cure” the allegations in the Notice, was sent via e-mail to the Insured c/o counsel of record on Tuesday, March 18, 2025. If the Department has any questions or requires any additional information, including a copy of the detailed response to the Notice provided to the Insured’s counsel, please contact us. Sincerely, /s/ Kyle A. Gretel Kyle A. Gretel, Esq. Phelps Dunbar LLP 100 South Ashley Drive Suite 2000 Tampa, FL 33602 E-mail: kyle.gretel@phelps.com
Acknowledgement
* 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