Filing Number: 804638
|
| Filing Accepted: 1/31/2025 |
| Last/Business Name
*
|
|
|
PALMER
|
|
First Name |
|
WILLIAM & JANET |
|
| Street Address
*
|
|
4014 W. GULF DRIVE |
| City, State Zip
*
|
|
SANIBEL,
FL
33957
|
| Email Address
*
|
|
WILLYPALMER1011@GMAIL.COM |
| Complainant Type:
*
|
|
Insured |
|
| Last/Business Name* |
|
PALMER |
|
First Name |
|
WILLIAM & JANET |
| Policy # * |
|
3565234072 |
|
Claim #* |
|
01000082085 |
|
Attorney is Applicable
|
| Last Name* |
MURRAY
First Name *
DAVID
Initial
C
|
| Street Address* |
|
109 N BRUSH ST., STE. 350 |
| City, State Zip* |
|
TAMPA
,
FLORIDA
33602
|
| Email Address * |
|
SERVICE@MURRAYLAWGROUP.COM |
|
|
| Insurer Type
*
|
|
 Authorized Insurer
 Unauthorized Insurer
|
|
|
| Insurer Name |
|
|
| Insurer Name* |
|
FIRST PROTECTIVE INSURANCE COMPANY
|
| Insurer Name* |
|
|
| Street Address* |
|
|
| City, State Zip* |
|
,
|
|
NAIC Company Code 10897 |
|
|
| Name of individual responsible for violation (if any):*
CLAIM SUPERVISORS, MANAGERS, AGENTS, ADJUSTERS, AND REPRESENTATIVES INCLUDING GARY BUCCIARELLI, KENNETH PLUNKETT, MARGARET FEATHERMAN, AMANDA N. CURRY MARLIN, BART DYER, JARED STEVENS, JAMIE ROARK, ARTY PION, AND NOEMI TEXIDOR.
|
| Type of Insurance
*
Residential Property & Casualty
|
|
|
| Reason for Notice
*
|
|
|
Claim Delay
|
|
|
Unsatisfactory Settlement Offer
|
|
|
Unfair Trade Practice
|
|
|
Other
:
Violation of Code of Ethics
|
|
|
Other
:
Litigation Strategy and Behavior
|
|
|
*
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)(2) |
|
A material misrepresentation made to an insured or any other person having an interest in the proceeds payable under such contract or policy, for the purpose and with the intent of effecting settlement of such claims, loss, or damage under such contract or policy on less favorable terms than those provided in, and contemplated by, such contract or policy.
|
|
| 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)(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.
|
|
| 626.9541(1)(i)(4) |
|
Failing to pay undisputed amounts of partial or full benefits owed under first-party property insurance policies within 60 days after an insurer receives notice of a residential property insurance claim, determines the amounts of partial or full benefits, and agrees to coverage, unless payment of the undisputed benefits is prevented by factors beyond the control of the insurer as defined in s. 627.70131(5).
|
|
| 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(j) |
|
Altering or amending an insurance adjuster’s report without:
(I) Providing a detailed explanation as to why any change that has the effect of reducing the estimate of the loss was made; and
(II) Including on the report or as an addendum to the report a detailed list of all changes made to the report and the identity of the person who ordered each change; or
(III) Retaining all versions of the report, and including within each such version, for each change made within such version of the report, the identity of each person who made or ordered such change;
|
|
*
Specific policy language that is relevant to the violation.
Enter all words or phrases (one at a time) that should be used to filter.
The Insureds do not have a certified copy of the Policy but believe the language relevant to the violations includes the applicable coverages and limits from the Declaration Pages as well as the following policy language:
AGREEMENT: We will provide the insurance described in this policy in return for the premium and compliance with all applicable provisions of this policy.
J. Loss Payment.
We will adjust all losses with you. We will pay you unless some other person is named in the policy or is legally entitled to receive payment and we have not elected our option to repair.
1. Loss will be payable upon the earlier of the following:
a. 20 days after we receive your proof of loss in compliance with SECTION I-CONDITIONS, C. Duties After Loss, paragraph 9, and reach written agreement with you; or
b. 60 days after we receive your proof of loss in compliance with SECTION I-CONDITIONS, C. Duties After Loss, paragraph 9; and
(1) There is an entry of a final judgment; or
(2) There is a filing of an appraisal award or a mediation settlement with us.
c. If payment is not denied, within 90 days after we receive notice of an initial, reopened or supplemental claim.
However, this provision c. does not apply if factors beyond our control reasonably prevent such payment.
Failure to comply with this provision c. does not form the basis of a private cause of action against us.
2. If payment is denied in part, we will pay the undisputed amounts within the same time stated unless we have exercised our option under SECTION I - CONDITIONS, I.
…
F. Mediation or Appraisal. If you and we fail to agree on the settlement regarding the loss,
prior to filing suit, you must notify us of your disagreement in writing so that either may:
1. Demand a mediation of the loss in accordance with the rules established by the Florida Department of Financial Services. The loss must be $500 or more, prior to the application of the deductible; or there must be a difference of $500 or more between the loss settlement amount we offer and the loss settlement amount that you request. The settlement in the course of the mediation is binding only if both parties agree, in writing, on a settlement and you have not rescinded the settlement within 3 business days after reaching settlement. You may not rescind the settlement after cashing or depositing the settlement check or draft we provided to you. We will pay the cost of conducting any mediation conference except when you fail to appear at a conference. That conference will then be rescheduled upon your payment of the mediator's fee for that rescheduled conference.
However, if we fail to appear at a mediation conference, we will pay the actual cash expenses you incur in attending the conference and also pay the mediator's fee for that rescheduled conference.
2. Request an appraisal of the loss if we fail to agree on the amount of the loss. Both parties must agree to the appraisal process.
a. A request for appraisal must be in writing and be signed by all Named "Insureds" shown in the Declarations. You must comply with SECTION I -CONDITIONS, C. Duties After Loss before making a request for appraisal.
At least 10 days before requesting appraisal, the party seeking appraisal must provide the other party with a written estimate of the amount of any dispute that results from the covered cause of loss. The estimate shall include a description of each item of damaged property in dispute as a result of the covered loss, along with the extent of damage and the estimated amount to repair or replace the item.
b. In this event, each party will choose a competent appraiser within 20 days after receiving a written request from the other. To qualify as a competent appraiser, neither the appraiser nor the company that employs the appraiser is entitled to receive a fee
that is dependent on the amount of the appraisal award. However, the payment of an hourly or flat fee shall not render an appraiser incompetent under this provision.
c. The two appraisers will choose a competent, disinterested umpire. If they cannot agree upon an umpire within 15 days, you or we may request that the choice be made by a judge of a court of record in the state where the "residence premises" is located.
d. The appraisers will separately set the amount of the loss. If the appraisers submit a written report of an agreement to us, the amount agreed upon will be the amount of the loss. If they fail to agree, they will submit their differences to the umpire. A decision agreed to by any two will set the amount of the loss.
In all instances, the written report of agreement will be in writing and shall include the following:
(1) A detailed list, including the amount to repair or replace, of each specific item included in the award from the appraisal findings;
(2) The agreed amount of each item, its replacement cost value and corresponding actual cash value; and
(3) The statement of "This award is made subject to the terms and conditions of the policy."
Each party will:(a) Pay its own appraiser, including their costs associated with producing the estimate in 2.a. of this provision, above; and (b) Bear the other expenses of the appraisal and umpire equally.
e. You, we, the appraisers, and the umpire shall be given reasonable and timely access to inspect the property, in accordance with the terms of the policy.
f. You" and "We" do not waive any rights by demanding or submitting to an appraisal and retain all contractual rights to determine if coverage applies to each item in dispute.
g. Appraisal is only available to determine the amount of the loss of each item in dispute. The appraisers and the umpire have no authority to decide:
(1) Any other questions of fact;
(2) Questions of law;
(3) Questions of coverage;
(4) Other contractual issues; or
to conduct appraisal on a class-wide basis.
|
| |
*
Facts and circumstances giving rise to the violation.
Enter all words or phrases (one at a time) that should be used to filter.
In addition of the above statutory provisions alleged to have been violated, see also the
following statutes and rules:
624.155(1)(a)1 Any person may bring a civil action against an insurer when such person is damaged: (a) by violation of any of the following provisions by the insurer: (1) Section 626.9541(1)(i), (o), or (x).
69B-220.201(3)(b) An adjuster shall treat all claimants equally.
69B-220.201(3)(b)(2) An adjuster shall adjust all claims strictly in accordance with the Insurance contract
69B-220.201(3)(c) An adjuster shall not approach investigations, adjustments, and settlements in a manner prejudicial to the insured.
69B-220.201(3)(d) An adjuster shall make truthful and unbiased reports of the facts after making a complete investigation.
69B-220.201(3)(f) An adjuster, upon undertaking the handling of a claim, shall act with dispatch and due diligence in achieving a proper disposition of the claim.
69B-220.201(3)(h) An adjuster shall not advise a claimant to refrain from seeking legal advice, nor advise against the retention of counsel or the employment of a public adjuster to protect the claimant’s interest.
69B-220.201(3)(j) An adjuster shall not knowingly fail to advise a claimant of the claimant’s claim options in accordance with the terms and conditions of the insurance contract.
69B-220.201(3)(k) An adjuster shall not undertake the adjustment of any claim concerning which the adjuster is not currently competent and knowledgeable as to the terms and conditions of the insurance coverage, or which otherwise exceeds the adjuster’s current expertise.
626.877 Every adjuster shall adjust or investigate every claim, damage, or loss made or occurring under an insurance contract, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract and of the applicable laws of this state.
626.878 An adjuster shall subscribe to the code of ethics specified in the rules of the department. The rules shall implement the provisions of this part and specify the terms and conditions of contracts, including a right to cancel, and require practices necessary to ensure fair dealing, prohibit conflicts of interest, and ensure preservation of the rights of the claimant to participate in the adjustment of claims.
626.9744(1) When a loss requires repair or replacement of an item or part, any physical damage incurred in making such repair or replacement which is covered and not otherwise excluded by the policy shall be included in the loss to the extent of any applicable limits. The insured may not be required to pay for betterment required by ordinance or code except for the applicable deductible, unless specifically excluded or limited by the policy.
626.9744(2) When a loss requires replacement of items and the replaced items do not match in quality, color, or size, the insurer shall make reasonable repairs or replacement of items in adjoining areas. In determining the extent of the repairs or replacement of items in adjoining areas, the insurer may consider the cost of repairing or replacing the undamaged portions of the property, the degree of uniformity that can be achieved without such cost, the remaining useful life of the undamaged portion, and other relevant factors.
627.70131(1)(a) Upon an insurer’s receiving a communication with respect to a claim, the insurer shall, within 14 calendar days, review and acknowledge receipt of such communication unless payment is made within that period of time or unless the failure to acknowledge is caused by factors beyond the control of the insurer which reasonably prevent such acknowledgment. If the acknowledgment is not in writing, a notification indicating acknowledgment shall be made in the insurer’s claim file and dated. A communication made to or by an agent of an insurer with respect to a claim shall constitute communication to or by the insurer.
627.70131(2) Such acknowledgment shall be responsive to the communication. If the communication constitutes a notification of a claim, unless the acknowledgment reasonably advises the claimant that the claim appears not to be covered by the insurer, the acknowledgment shall provide necessary claim forms, and instructions, including an appropriate telephone number.
627.70131(3) (e) The insurer must send the policyholder a copy of any detailed estimate of the amount of the loss within 7 days after the estimate is generated by an insurer’s adjuster. This paragraph does not require that an insurer create a detailed estimate of the amount of the loss if such estimate is not reasonably necessary as part of the claim investigation.
627.70131(7)(a) Within 60 days after an insurer receives notice of an initial, reopened, or supplemental property insurance claim from a policyholder, the insurer shall pay or deny such claim or a portion of the claim unless the failure to pay is caused by factors beyond the control of the insurer. The insurer shall provide a reasonable explanation in writing to the policyholder of the basis in the insurance policy, in relation to the facts or applicable law, for the payment, denial, or partial denial of a claim. If the insurer’s claim payment is less than specified in any insurer’s detailed estimate of the amount of the loss, the insurer must provide a reasonable explanation in writing of the difference to the policyholder. Any payment of an initial or supplemental claim or portion of such claim made 60 days after the insurer receives notice of the claim, or made after the expiration of any additional timeframe provided to pay or deny a claim or a portion of a claim made pursuant to an order of the office finding factors beyond the control of the insurer, whichever is later, bears interest at the rate set forth in s. 55.03. Interest begins to accrue from the date the insurer receives notice of the claim. The provisions of this subsection may not be waived, voided, or nullified by the terms of the insurance policy. If there is a right to prejudgment interest, the insured must select whether to receive prejudgment interest or interest under this subsection. Interest is payable when the claim or portion of the claim is paid. Failure to comply with this subsection constitutes a violation of this code. However, failure to comply with this subsection does not form the sole basis for a private cause of action.
FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES GIVING RISE TO THE VIOLATION
The property located at 4014 W. Gulf Drive, Sanibel, Florida was damaged by Hurricane Ian on or about September 28, 2022. The Insureds, William & Janet Palmer, timely provided notice of the loss to their property insurer, First Protective Insurance Company d/b/a Frontline Insurance (“Frontline”).
Frontline initially sent a field adjuster to inspect and adjust the loss in October 2022. The field adjuster incorrectly identified the property as a multi-family condo, and recommended payment based on HO6 coverage (instead of HO3). This was the first of many delays.
The Insureds retained a public adjuster to assist with the claim due to the extensive nature of the damages. The Public Adjuster provided his Letter of Representation on November 15, 2022. The Public Adjuster requested an advance based on Frontline’s delay to make any payments due in part to its mistake in classifying the property as a condo. Frontline did not respond to this claim communication.
On November 12, 2022, the Insureds received call directly from Frontline’s newly assigned field adjuster, Jamie Roark. The field adjuster attempted to schedule another inspection directly with Insureds. When the Insureds advised they had a Public Adjuster, Frontline (through Adjuster Roark) stated “Oh, a public adjuster, they can take 10, 20, 30 percent of your money.” This comment is highly improper, disparaging, and contrary to Florida Admin Code Rule 69B-220.201(3)(h).
On December 6, 2022, Frontline advised it would be assigned a new field adjuster due to Adjuster Roark’s improper conduct/statements to the Insureds. On this same day, the Insureds submitted their executed Proof of Loss. Frontline (through Adjuster Margaret Featherman) advised they needed to fill out a different Proof of Loss (on Frontline’s form).
On December 16, 2022, Frontline (through Adjuster Gary Bucciarelli) conducted another inspection. In an estimate dated January 5, 2023, Frontline concluded that dwelling damages total $167,742.28 (RCV). Frontline issued payment of $123,243.977 by check issued January 6, 2023 ($167,742.28 – $7,498.31 depreciation – $37,000 deductible).
On January 6, 2023, the Insureds (through their Public Adjuster) provided Frontline with the following documentation:
• Frontline-specific Sworn Proof of Loss (showing repair costs of $1,237,051.75 and personal property damages $70,498.16)
• Damage estimate prepared by their Public Adjuster
• Personal property inventory
• ALE ledger
• Moisture map from Restorex showing that water soaked most of the insured property from the third floor sliding glass door that was knocked down by wind (water cascaded through floors and ceilings from third floor down to ground floor)
• Water/Mold protocol from Eco Mold Testing LLC indicating Category 2 & 3 water throughout property, that the Insured Property was still wet, and needed to be fully gutted because the water was present for 3+ weeks until Sanibel Causeway could be rebuilt (i.e. no access to the insured property).
On or about January 9, Fowcon (a vendor retained by Frontline) contacted the Insureds directly to schedule an inspection. This was the second time Frontline and/or its vendors tried to bypass the Public Adjuster’s representation. Fowcon inspected on January 10, 2023. At this time, Inspector Sven Joyner reviewed the Moisture Map and Mold Protocol and stated the property would need a near complete gut and that his estimate would be extensive.
On January 10, 2023, Frontline’s assigned adjuster contacted the Insureds directly again. By email sent January 13, 2023, the Public Adjuster addressed Frontline’s continued behavior of contacting the Insureds directly. Frontline did not timely respond to the claim communication. The Public Adjuster followed up on February 6, 2023 and also requested a copy of the Fowcon report. This correspondence was ignored by Frontline as were the Public Adjuster’s multiple telephone calls. On February 24, 2023, the Public Adjuster sent a letter advising Frontline it had failed to communicate for 42 days (despite the Public Adjuster’s claim communications and phone calls). The Public Adjuster sent another follow up email on March 3, 2023 after Frontline continued to refuse to communicate with him about the Insureds’ claim.
After nearly two months of no communication, Frontline (through Adjuster Amanda Marlin) finally contacted the Insured on March 7, 2023. Adjuster Marline advised she needed time to review the file. On March 15, 2023, the Insureds’ Public Adjuster emailed Frontline again to inquire about the status of requested reports (Fowcon and engineering) and to discuss the claim in general given the vast difference in the estimates and documented damages.
On March 17, 2023, Frontline advised it was assigning a “complex loss adjuster” due to the extent of the damages. This caused yet another delay and Frontline should have retained a “complex loss adjuster” at the onset given the nature and extent of damages—not six months after the loss.
Frontline’s new adjuster, Bary Dyer, contacted the Public Adjuster on March 27, 2023 and advised he needed all documents for the claim. The Public Adjuster sent over all documentation (even though everything had already been provided to Frontline). Frontline (through Adjuster Dyer) completed its fifth inspection on March 31, 2023.
The Insureds’ Public Adjuster sent an email to Adjuster Dyer on April 18, 2023 to obtain a status. On April 19, 2023, Adjuster Dyer advised he was working on the claim, advised it would be “a massive claim,” and estimated damages were around $1.5 million given the moisture map, protocol, and quality level of the fixtures/tex/drywall, etc. Adjuster Dyer advised he told Frontline it would take him approximately 80-man hours to accurately review and estimate the file.
The Public Adjuster continued to communicate with Adjuster Dyer about the claim and provided additional requested information (including information for incurred mitigation costs). On May 12, 2023, Adjuster Dyer advised he was at $700k without water or mold mitigation, without exterior damages, and incomplete interior repairs. Adjuster Dyer said he needed just a few more days to complete the estimate. Adjuster Dyer expressed concern because Frontline was having him remove certain items from other estimates he was working on (such as water mitigation). Adjuster Dyer said his estimate would probably be around $1.2 - $1.5 million dollars upon completion.
On May 20, 2023, the Public Adjuster learned that Frontline had instructed Adjuster Dyer to remove mitigation from his report and to turn the report in even though it was incomplete. On May 23, 2023, Frontline (through Adjuster Marlin) advised it had gotten in trouble because the Insureds had filed a DOI complaint and it has to “force out payments” when upper-levels gets involved. Frontline then provided the estimate to the Insureds which showed damages of $459,437.70 (RCV)— less than half of what Adjuster Dyer advised the final estimate would be. Frontline issued an additional payment based on this estimate.
On May 23, 2023, the Insureds received an “Appraisal Demand” from Frontline along with an “agreement for submission to appraisers.” The Public Adjuster wrote back and advised that Frontline failed to comply with the Policy requirement that it must provide a written estimate of the disputed items at least 10 days prior to requesting appraisal. On May 31, 2023, Frontline then sent a letter stating the Insureds could go mediation or appraisal because Frontline disagreed with their estimate.
On June 1, 2023, Frontline (through Adjuster Marlin) advised it would not be paying anything for water mitigation as it would prefer that to be included in the appraisal process (even though the costs were already incurred). The Insureds’ Public Adjuster asked again for the Fowcon report at this time. Frontline advised the report was considered invalid because it had asked for a “mold comparative” not a “mold AND water comparative.” This excuse lacks merit because Frontline could easily remove any “wtr” code items within Xactimate. Instead of addressing the damages reflected in the Fowcon report, Frontline is ignoring the report to the detriment of its Insureds.
In a revised estimate dated August 28, 2023, Frontline concluded that damages total $524,004.93 (RCV). Frontline issued an additional payment based on this estimate.
The Insureds (through their Public Adjuster) continued to provide documentation to Frontline in support of their claim, including documents for incurred costs, updates to their personal property inventory, and ALE documents. Frontline issued some additional proceeds but the payments continued to be grossly insufficient to restore the Insured Property to its pre-loss condition.
The claim proceeded to a very lengthy appraisal process. An umpire was selected, and the panel inspection occurred on August 23, 2024.
While the claim was still in the appraisal process, Frontline requested to take the Insureds’ Examinations Under Oath and requested voluminous documents. Most of the requested documents had already been provided and those documents not previously produced were irrelevant and/or harassing requests. Nonetheless, the Insureds produced the requested documents and appeared for their Examinations Under Oath on January 14, 2025.
On January 21, 2025, the umpire signed the Appraisal Award setting the loss at $942,858.04 (RCV) / $900,455.31 (ACV). The significant amount of the Award shows how severely Frontline undervalued and underpaid the claim.
Available Coverage Amount of Loss •RCV Amount of Loss Depreciation Amount of Loss - ACV
Coverage A - Dwelling $756,451.50 $39,672.73 $716,778.77
Additional Debris Removal Not in this appraisal $0.00 Not in this appraisal
Ordinance or Law- windows &doors $1,188.40 $0.00 $1,188.40
Emergency Mitigation Services Not in this appraisal $0.00 Not in this appraisal
Water Mitigation $82,022.99 $0.00 $82,022.99
Tarp Not in this appraisal $0.00 Not in this appraisal
Screen Enclosure $46,800.00 $2,730.00 $44,070.00
Fungi, Wet or Dry Rot, or Bacteria $33,420.15 $0.00 $33,420.15
Mold/Demo $21,960.00 $0.00 $21,960.00
Mold/Testing $1,015.00 $0.00 $1,015.00
Coverage B- Other Structures Not in this appraisal $0.00 Not in this appraisal
Coverage C - Personal Property Not in this appraisal $0.00 Not in this appraisal
Coverage D/E- Loss of Use Not in this appraisal $0.00 Not in this appraisal
TOTAL $942,858.04 $42,402.73 $900,455.31
Over two years have passed since the Insured Property was damaged (and since the claim was reported). Frontline has delayed the claim, significantly undervalued the loss, and failed to issue all amounts owed for the damage to the Insured Property. Throughout the adjustment, Frontline failed to timely respond to claim communications (or to even respond at all), failed to keep the Insureds informed of the claim status, and failed to timely provide the Insureds with information and documentation to which they are entitled. The Insureds fully complied with Frontline as required under the Policy and fully cooperated with Frontline in its investigation. Frontline has failed to create and implement adequate guidelines for proper claims investigation, claims evaluation, claims handling, and for training and supervision of employees and independent contractors handling its claims resulting in statutory violations as set forth above.
The concept of insurance is that it is the insurer's granting of timely and prompt indemnity or security against a contingent loss. Fla. Stat. § 624.02 defines insurance as a contract whereby one undertakes to indemnify another or pay or allow specified amount or a determinable benefit upon determinable contingencies. Inherent is the fact that payment is made timely and promptly so that insureds may mitigate their damages and be put back into the position they were in prior to the loss as quickly as possible. Frontline has failed to comply with its duty to indemnify the Insureds.
Frontline refused to provide a proper scope of repairs for the Insured Property and failed to pay all insurance proceeds owed to the Insureds. Refusal and/or failure to settle the Insureds’ claim when under all the circumstances it could have and should have done so had it acted fairly and honestly towards the Insureds is wrong.
The actions taken by Frontline in the handling and adjustment of the Insureds’ claim were willful, wanton, and in disregard for the rights of its Insureds and occur with such a frequency as to indicate a general business practice, and further, are in violation of Florida Statutes § 624.155 and § 626.9541.
Based on the foregoing actions and omissions, Frontline has engaged in wrongful conduct. That wrongful conduct includes, but is not limited to, the following:
1. Improper claim delay.
2. Undervaluing the damages to the Insured Property.
3. Underpaying the damages to the Insured Property.
4. Not conducting a full and fair investigation of the Insureds’ claim.
5. Looking for ways to deny recovery to the Insureds.
6. Looking for ways to delay recovery to the Insureds.
7. Not adjusting the claim and not evaluating the loss properly, promptly, and fairly so that the Insureds were fully and promptly indemnified.
8. Failing to implement proper standards for the adjustment and investigation of insurance claims.
9. Not training, supervising, or managing adjusters and independent contractors properly so that prompt and full payments are made, but rather placing the company’s interests before the policyholders’ interests by attempting to deny or minimize payments owed.
10. Establishing severity control initiatives and otherwise establishing a culture of not fully and promptly paying claims following losses.
11. Making misrepresentations to the Insureds about the extent of damages at the Insured Property.
12. Making misrepresentations to the Insureds about the scope of necessary repairs at the Insured Property.
13. Failing to acknowledge and/or respond to the Insureds’ claim communications (and/or the communications from the Insureds’ Public Adjuster).
14. Making disparaging marks about public adjusters.
15. Repeatedly contacting the Insureds directly even though Frontline knew they were represented by a public adjuster.
16. Failing to provide coverage necessary to restore the Insured Property to its pre-loss condition.
17. Failing to provide the Insureds with a copy of original and/or unaltered damage estimates.
18. Attempting to invoke appraisal contrary to the terms of the Policy.
19. Ignoring reports, estimates, and/or documents provided to it by its own vendors showing greater damages than its payments.
20. Instructing its adjusters to remove items from their estimates to reduce payments.
Therefore, to cure the defects outlined in this Civil Remedy Notice, First Protective Insurance Company d/b/a Frontline Insurance must:
• Tender all additional amounts owed under the Policy for the covered loss to the Insured Property per the appraisal award.
A copy of this form has been submitted to the FDFS and has been provided to the following parties providing them notice of the filing of the Civil Remedy Notice:
• First Protective Insurance Company, via DFS filing.
• First Protective Ins. Co., c/o Adjuster Noemi Texidor (nTexidor@flhi.com; info@flhi.com)
• First Protective Ins. Co., c/o Mr. Jason Terry, Esq. (Jason@bcflalaw.com)
• Mr. & Mrs. Palmer, via email.
• Mr. William Aultman, via email.
|
|
|
*
|
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
|