Civil Remedy Notice of Insurer Violations
Login

Filing Number:     807198
Filing Accepted:  2/17/2025
         Print Filing
Complainant
Last/Business Name *  
CERAZIN MICHAUD   First Name   SARETTE MERVILUS AND
Street Address * 5410 LITTLE DIPPER COURT
City, State Zip * GREENACRES, FL 33463
Email Address * N/A
Complainant Type: * Insured
Insured
Last/Business Name*   CERAZIN MICHAUD   First Name   SARETTE MERVILUS AND
Policy # * SIC3139824 Claim #* 202410010015
Attorney
Attorney is Applicable
Last Name* ELIMELECH First Name * REBECCA Initial R
Street Address* 1500 N.E. 162ND ST.
City, State Zip* MIAMI , FLORIDA 33162
Email Address * RELIMELECH@ILGPA.COM
Violation
Insurer Type *   Authorized Insurer Unauthorized Insurer
 
Insurer Name*   SLIDE INSURANCE COMPANY
NAIC Company Code 17227
 
Name of individual responsible for violation (if any):* N/A
Type of Insurance * Residential Property & Casualty   
Reason for Notice *
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)(c) Failing to acknowledge and act promptly upon communications with respect to claims.
626.9541(1)(i)(3)(e) Failing to affirm or deny full or partial coverage of claims, and, as to partial coverage, the dollar amount or extent of coverage, or failing to provide a written statement that the claim is being investigated, upon the written request of the insured within 30 days after proof-of-loss statements have been completed.
626.9541(1)(i)(3)(g) Failing to promptly notify the insured of any additional information necessary for the processing of a claim.
* Specific policy language that is relevant to the violation.
Enter all words or phrases (one at a time) that should be used to filter.

SECTION I – PROPERTY COVERAGES A. Coverage A – Dwelling 1. We cover: a. The dwelling on the "residence premises" shown in the Declarations, including structures attached to the dwelling; and b. Materials and supplies located on or next to the "residence premises" used to construct, alter or repair the dwelling or other structures on the "residence premises". SECTION I – PERILS INSURED AGAINST A. Coverage A – Dwelling and Coverage B – Other Structures 1. We insure against risk of direct physical loss to property described in Coverages A and B.
 
* Facts and circumstances giving rise to the violation.
Enter all words or phrases (one at a time) that should be used to filter.

Sarette Mervilus and Cerazin Michaud (hereinafter the “Insureds”), paid for a policy of insurance with Slide Insurance Company (hereinafter, “Insurer”) bearing policy number SIC3139824 (the “Policy”). The Policy provides coverage for damage to the Insureds’ property located at 5410 Little Dipper Court, Greenacres, FL 33463 (the “Property”), including the significant damage that occurred as a result of hail on or about March 3, 2024 (the “loss”). Specifically, the Insureds’ Property sustained substantial wind damage, roof damage, floor damage and water intrusion in the girl's bedroom, office, living room, and laundry room. The Insureds subsequently contacted the Insurance Litigation Group, P.A. (hereafter, ILGPA), who reported the Insureds’ claim to the Insurer. On November 27, 2024, the Insurer sent a letter to the Insureds advising that the damages to the Property totaled $0.00 based on their inspection of the damage. On January 28, 2025, the Insurer issued a letter to the Insureds stating that they are proceeding with their adjustment of the claim under a reservation of rights as the Insurer is requesting documentation and a recorded statement with the Insureds. ILGPA conducted a thorough inspection of the property and compiled an estimate of damages. ILGPA, on behalf of the Insureds, forwarded said estimate which fully detailed the Insureds’ damages and total $55,456.95. However, the Insurer refuses to resolve the Insureds’ claim and pay for all damages to the Property. The Insurer’s conduct is in bad faith and violates Florida’s statutes concerning the adjustment of insurance claims. First, Florida Statute § 624.155(1)(B)(1) requires good faith in the settlement of claims. The Insurer is in violation of this Statute for failing to provide a reasonable repair estimate. Furthermore, the Insurer ignored several attempts from the Insureds to comply with the Insurer’s request for a recorded statement. On February 13, 2025, ILGPA, on behalf of the Insureds, called the Insurer four times to conduct the recorded statement as scheduled. ILGPA left a voicemail after each attempt as the Insurer failed to answer the phone. What is more, the Insurer violated Florida Statute § 624.155(1)(b)(3) by failing to promptly settle the claim, when the obligation to settle the claim became reasonably clear. Again, the Insurer failed to make a good faith offer to settle this claim and failed to account for the full scope of the damages. They failed to respond to the estimate provided by ILGPA, on the Insureds’ behalf, in a timely manner. They are obligated to provide coverage for all damages to the Insureds’ Property, and not attempt to resolve this claim with lowball offers. Additionally, the Insurer’s conduct violates Florida Statute § 626.9541, which prohibits unfair settlement practices. More specifically, the Insurer has violated Florida Statute § 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(a) by failing to adopt and implement standards for the proper investigation of claims. Further, the Insurer has violated Florida Statute § 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(c) by failing to acknowledge and act promptly with the Insureds and its counsel. Although the Insurer requested a recorded statement with the Insureds, the Insurer failed to respond to the Insureds to conduct the recorded statement on the scheduled date. Moreover, as mentioned above, the Insurer failed to account for the full scope of the damages and has additionally failed to respond to the estimate provided by ILGPA, on behalf of the Insureds, in a timely manner, delaying the resolution of this claim. Had the Insurer done so, it would have immediately settled this claim on a fair and reasonable basis and provided full coverage to its Insureds. Also, the Insurer violated Florida Statute § 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(e) by failing to affirm or deny full or partial coverage of the claim. Furthermore, the Insurer violated Florida Statute § 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(g) by failing to promptly notify the Insureds of any additional information necessary for the processing of a claim. The Insurer sent a letter to the Insureds requesting documentation on January 28, 2025, over three months after the claim was reported. Therefore, to cure the defects outlined in this Civil Remedy Notice, the Insurer must: (1) create and implement adequate guidelines for the proper investigation and evaluation of claims and for the training and supervision of employees, which will avoid future statutory violations and avoid this from occurring in the future; (2) immediately tender all insurance proceeds due and owing its Insureds under the Policy in the amount of $55,456.95 (less the deductible and any prior payments), plus all statutory interest; (3) act fairly and honestly towards its Insureds and with due regard for their interests in attempting to settle their Insureds’ claim; (4) hold the claim open in the event that its errors and delay does or may cause the Insureds to suffer either further loss and/or damage; and, (5) stipulate to the Insureds’ entitlement to attorney’s fees and court costs pursuant to Florida Statutes §§ 627.428 and 626.9373. Acknowledgment This notice is given in order to perfect the right to pursue the civil remedy authorized by Florida Statutes section 624.155, should Slide Insurance Company fail to cure the violations set forth in this Civil Remedy Notice within the given cure period.
Comments
User Id Date Added Comment
mnixon@slideinsurance.com 04-02-2025 Via E-mail & Posting on DFS Website Rebecca R. Elimelech, Esq. Insurance Litigation Group, P.A. 1500 N.E. 162nd St North Miami Beach, FL 33162 relimelech@ilgpa.com Complainant: Sarette Mervilus and Cerazin Michaud Insured: Sarette Mervilus and Cerazin Michaud Claim No: 202410010015 Policy No: 10211447 Date of loss: 03/02/2024 CRN Filing No.: 807198 Dear Ms. Elimelech: Please allow this correspondence to serve as Slide Insurance Company’s (“Slide”)’s response to the Civil Remedy Notice (“CRN”) that was filed on behalf of Sarette Mervilus and Cerazin Michaud (“Insured”). Herein, we include a brief factual history of the underlying claim and actions by Slide which reveals it has acted properly in responding to the underlying claim and in compliance with its contractual and legal obligations. Slide denies each and every allegation brought forth in the CRN and denies any wrongdoing in the handling of the underlying claim. Slide further notes that the CRN is invalid and improper as the correct policy number is 10211447, not SIC3139824. Additionally, Slide denies violating any Florida Statute or Administrative Code as set forth more specifically herein. Moreover, Slide denies violating any provisions or duties set forth in the applicable policy of insurance. Slide further states that the facts and circumstances that are set forth in the CRN, while incomplete and misleading, do not give rise to any violation of any statute or policy provision referenced in the Notice. Furthermore, Slide challenges the validity of the CRN for lacking specificity. See, e.g., Julien v. United Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 311 So.3d 875, 879 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021) (affirming dismissal for civil remedy notice’s failure to either strictly, or substantially, comply with statutory specificity requirement); Demase v. State Farm Florida Insurance Company, 357 So.3d 136, 138-39 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022) (holding that the trial court properly determined that a CRN that failed to state with specificity the relevant policy language was legally insufficient). Finally, the Notice is improper as the Insured failed to establish that Slide breached the policy of insurance, as required by Fla. Stat. § 624.1551. CLAIM FACTS The underlying claim was reported on October 11, 2024, as a claim for alleged damages related to an alleged weather event in Palm Beach County with a DOL of March 2, 2024. Prior to reporting the claim, on September 11, 2024, the Insured reported a Hurricane Debby claim under claim number 202409004346. The alleged damages in claim number 202409004346 overlap with claim number 202410010015. Nonetheless, Slide promptly adjusted the loss, including but not limited to, reaching out multiple times to schedule the initial inspection with Independent Adjuster Tiffany Parker, who finally inspected on November 20, 2024, and by scheduling a reinspection with Professional Engineer Dana D. Race of Grindley Williams Engineering. Based on Slide’s investigation and evaluation as to the underlying claim, Slide notified the Insured that there is not any coverage for the alleged loss pursuant to the Policy’s terms, conditions, endorsements, limitations, and exclusions. Thus, Slide maintains that it has acted in accordance with the terms of the subject insurance policy, and the law, and has acted in good faith towards the Insured. Slide denies that it violated any statutes or committed the acts asserted in the CRN. Slide neither waives nor is estopped from asserting any and all rights that it may have in law or under the terms of the policy. Slide expressly reserves all such rights without exception or limitation. REASONS FOR THE NOTICE The CRN alleges three (3) reasons for the filing of the Notice. However, no specific facts or circumstances are provided to support the allegations. Notwithstanding, Slide denies the allegations as follows: 1. Claim Delay: Slide denies any delay in the claims handling process of the underlying loss as is evident from the facts outlined above. Slide promptly acknowledged the claim and timely initiated its investigation of the loss including inspection(s) of the subject property. Slide acted in accordance with its duties and obligations pursuant to the policy of insurance and responded appropriately to information and documentation that was provided. Thus, Slide asserts that this allegation is without basis and therefore denied. 2. Unsatisfactory Settlement Offer: Slide denies that it extended any unsatisfactory settlement offers to the Insured. Slide promptly investigated the loss and notified the Insured that there is not any coverage for the alleged loss based on the investigation and evaluation of the claim. Slide asserts that it has acted in good faith towards its Insured at all times. Thus, this allegation is without basis and therefore denied. 3. Unfair Trade Practice: There is no basis for this allegation, thus it is wholly denied. The Insured has submitted no facts or circumstances to support this allegation. The handling and administration of this claim occurred with the expediency and timeliness allowed by the statutory requirements imposed upon Slide. At no time did Slide, its agents, or its employees delay the handling, administration, or disposition of this claim. The facts show that Slide acted promptly with respect to the investigation of the underlying claim and made communications as necessary to adjust the claim in a prompt and appropriate matter. Information necessary and relevant to the proceeding of the claim were communicated to the Insured or their representatives in an appropriate manner. Thus, this allegation is without basis and therefore denied. ALLEGED STATUTORY VIOLATIONS The CRN alleges multiple statutory violations. However, no specific facts or circumstances are provided to support these allegations. Notwithstanding, Slide denies each and every allegation of statutory violation individually as follows: 1. 624.155(1)(b)(1): Denied. The underlying claim was investigated and adjusted in as thorough and expedient a manner as possible. Following the investigation and evaluation of the underlying claim, the Insured was notified that there is not any coverage for the alleged loss pursuant to the Policy’s terms, conditions, endorsements, limitations, and exclusions. Moreover, the Insured has submitted absolutely no facts or circumstances supporting this allegation. 2. 624.155(1)(b)(3): Denied. Slide has not failed to promptly settle the underlying claim. The underlying claim was investigated and adjusted in as thorough and expedient a manner as possible. Following the investigation and evaluation of the underlying claim, the Insured was notified that there is not any coverage for the alleged loss pursuant to the Policy’s terms, conditions, endorsements, limitations, and exclusions. Accordingly, Slide asserts its full and strict compliance with the statutory requirements imposed upon it.  Moreover, the Insured has submitted absolutely no facts or circumstances supporting this allegation. 3. 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(a): Denied. This allegation is without basis. Slide has adopted and implemented standards for the proper investigation of claims at all times during the investigation of the subject matter. The aforementioned facts demonstrate that Slide employed proper and customary claims practices in the investigation and adjustment of this claim including, but not limited to, inspection(s) of the Insured’s property and timely communications with the Insured and their representatives. Accordingly, Slide asserts its full and strict compliance with the statutory requirements imposed upon it. Finally, the Insured has submitted absolutely no facts or circumstances supporting this allegation. 4. 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(c): Denied. This allegation is without basis. Slide has consistently acted promptly upon all communications with respect to this claim as previously outlined. Slide has adjusted the underlying loss in as thorough and expedient a manner as possible. Moreover, Slide routinely communicated with the Insured and/or their representatives regarding the underlying claim. Thus, Slide asserts its full and strict compliance with the statutory requirements imposed upon it. Any assertions to the contrary are unsupported by the facts. 5. 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(e): Denied. This allegation is without basis.  As referenced in the factual narrative above, Slide investigated the reported claim and issued its coverage determination. There is simply no support for this allegation and Slide asserts its full and strict compliance with the statutory requirements imposed upon it. Finally, the Insured has submitted absolutely no facts or circumstances supporting this allegation. 6. 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(g): Denied.  This allegation is without basis.  Slide promptly notified the Insured and/or their representatives regarding the pertinent claim facts and information needed relating to the claim. Slide’s communications prove this fact.  Accordingly, Slide asserts its full and strict compliance with the statutory requirements imposed upon it.  Finally, the Insured has submitted absolutely no facts or circumstances supporting this allegation. ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE INSURANCE POLICY The CRN fails to allege specific violations of the insurance policy and provides no specific facts or circumstances of wrongdoing. The boilerplate CRN merely sets forth blanket allegations of wrongdoing, without further information. As such, the CRN is defective, as it failed to specifically identify the policy language that is the subject of the alleged violation, and further failed to include sufficient facts to put Slide on notice of the alleged violations. Notwithstanding, Slide denies any and all allegations of policy violations. All actions by Slide were done in compliance with the applicable Policy. As indicated above, Slide thoroughly investigated the reported loss including inspection of the Insured’s property. Thus, it is clear that Slide has acted in compliance with the Policy. Slide asserts that it has at all times complied with the terms of the Policy and has complied with all applicable provisions of the Policy and Florida Statutes in the handling of this matter. STATEMENTS AS TO CURING THE DEFECTS OUTLINED IN THE NOTICE The CRN asserts that Slide must tender all insurance benefits due and owing. Additionally, the CRN alleges that Slide must stipulate to the Insured’s attorneys’ fees and costs when the Insured is not entitled to attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to Fla. Stat. §627.428(4), and Fla. Stat. §626.9373 because Slide is not a surplus lines insurer. Nevertheless, the method for curing violations alleged in a Civil Remedy Notice is not determined by the Insured. Talat Enterprises, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty Surety Co., 753 So. 2d So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 2000). Accordingly, Florida Statutes Section 624.155 does not impose on an insurer the obligation to pay whatever the Insured demands. Section 624.155(2)(d) would have no effect or purpose under such an interpretation. Thus, Slide reasserts that it has acted in good faith towards its Insured at all times. Slide references to all the facts herein, which unequivocally demonstrate Slide’s expedient and timely administration of the Insured’s claim. Slide further asserts its full and strict compliance with the Policy and reiterates that it has acted properly in responding to the underlying claim in compliance with its contractual and legal obligations. Slide denies any wrongdoing in the handling of the underlying claim. Additionally, Slide denies violating any Florida Statute, Administrative Code, or code of ethics. CONCLUSION In conclusion, the documented facts of this claim establish that Slide acted diligently in its claims response and adequately performed its obligations under the policy of insurance and Florida law. Thus, the facts contradict all allegations that Slide has in any manner acted improperly or contrary to its contractual obligations to the Insured in this claim. Herein, Slide has attempted to fully and adequately respond to the allegations the Insured allege in the Civil Remedy Notice of Insurer Violation filed with the Department. Should there be any questions or further inquiry with respect to this matter, please contact the undersigned at (813) 761-1866 or at mnixon@slideinsurance.com. Sincerely, /s/ Michael Nixon Michael Nixon, Esq. Staff Counsel
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