Civil Remedy Notice of Insurer Violations
Login

Filing Number:     810225
Filing Accepted:  3/9/2025
         Print Filing
Complainant
Last/Business Name *  
DARROW   First Name   RUTH ANN
Street Address * 5501 3RD AVE PLAZA W
City, State Zip * BRADENTON, FL 34209
Email Address * N/A
Complainant Type: * Insured
Insured
Last/Business Name*   DARROW   First Name   RUTH ANN
Policy # * SJ31165317 Claim #* 202410008173
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)(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.
* 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". B. Coverage B – Other Structures 1. We cover other structures on the "residence premises" set apart from the dwelling by clear space. This includes structures connected to the dwelling by only a fence, utility line, or similar connection. C. Coverage C – Personal Property 1. Covered Property We cover personal property owned or used by an “insured” while it is anywhere in the world. After a loss and at your request, we will cover personal property owned by: a. Others while the property is on the part of the “residence premises” occupied by an “insured”; or b. A guest or a “residence employee”, while the property is in any residence occupied by an “insured”. 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. B. Coverage C – Personal Property We insure for direct physical loss to the property described in Coverage C caused by any of the following perils unless the loss is excluded in Section I – Exclusions. 2. Windstorm or Hail. This peril includes loss to watercraft of all types and their trailers, furnishings, equipment, and outboard engines or motors, only while inside a fully enclosed building. This peril does not include loss to the property contained in a building caused by rain, snow, sleet, sand or dust unless the direct force of wind or hail damages the building causing an opening in a roof or wall and the rain, snow, sleet, sand or dust enters through this opening.
 
* Facts and circumstances giving rise to the violation.
Enter all words or phrases (one at a time) that should be used to filter.

Ruth Ann Darrow (hereinafter the “Insured”), paid for a policy of insurance with Slide Insurance Company (hereinafter, “Insurer”) bearing policy number SJ31165317 (the “Policy”). The Policy provides coverage for damage to the Insured’s property located at 5501 3rd Ave Plaza West, Bradenton, Florida 34209 (the “Property”), including the significant damage that occurred as a result of Hurricane Milton on or about October 9, 2024 (the “loss”). Specifically, the Insured’s Property sustained substantial wind damage to the metal roof, interior, exterior of the home and personal property. The neighbor’s tree fell on the roof over the garage, which punctured holes in the metal roof, causing a storm-created opening and allowing water to enter through the roof. Water from wind driven rain ripped the metal roof apart. There are water stains on the ceilings. The flooring and ceiling need to be replaced. The vinyl siding is ripped to pieces in front of the house. The shutters are gone. The gutters are damaged. The fence is completely gone. The front bedroom and the front of the house are completely damaged. The Insured has content damage, lost food and incurred additional living expenses. The content damage includes but is not limited to mattresses, box springs and couches. The Insured promptly reported their claim to the Insurer. On October 27, 2024, the Insurer sent a letter to the Insured advising that the damages to the Property totaled $13,753.29. Specifically, the Insurer’s estimate shows that dwelling damages are $12,419.61, other structures damages are $1,038.37, and contents damages are $295.31. The Insured subsequently contacted the Interstate Public Adjusters LLC, who conducted a thorough inspection of the property and compiled an estimate of damages. Interstate Public Adjusters LLC, on behalf of the Insured, forwarded said estimate which fully detailed the Insured’s damages and total $183,977.83. However, the Insurer refuses to resolve the Insured’s 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. The underpayment has left the Insured unable to start repairs to the house. 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 Interstate Public Adjusters LLC, on the Insured’s behalf, in a timely manner. They are obligated to provide coverage for all damages to the Insured’s 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. Around two days after the hurricane, the Insurer inspected the property for about 20 minutes. The Insurer failed to properly investigate the claim as they substantially underpaid for the damages. Moreover, the Insurer violated Florida Statute § 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(b) by misrepresenting pertinent facts or insurance policy provisions relating to coverages at issue. On February 20, 2025, a roofing company contacted the Insured, claiming they had been sent by the Insurer to inspect the roof. The roofing company informed the Insured that, in order for the inspection to proceed, the Insured would need to sign a document. Upon reviewing the document, Interstate Public Adjusters LLC discovered it was a direction to pay contract for a full roof replacement. This direction to pay contract was essentially an attempt to mislead the Insured into signing an agreement that obligated her to pay for the roof if the Insurer did not. This roofing company attempted to deceive the Insured, who is a disabled elderly woman who lives alone, by falsely claiming that signing the document was necessary for her claim to be settled. Interstate Public Adjusters LLC immediately contacted the desk adjuster, who confirmed that the Insurer did indeed send this roofing company to inspect the roof. This situation is a clear case of bad faith handling. The Insurer’s failure to communicate, combined with this exploitative roofing company’s actions, is unacceptable. Further, the Insurer has violated Florida Statute § 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(c) by failing to acknowledge and act promptly with the Insured and its counsel. Interstate Public Adjusters LLC, on behalf of the Insured, submitted the estimate and proof of loss, after which the Insurer requested additional photos. On January 12, 2025, the Insured provided the requested photos, but since then, the Insurer has stopped responding to the Insured’s emails. The Insurer has neither accepted nor rejected the Insured’s proof of loss. 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 Interstate Public Adjusters LLC, on the Insured’s behalf, 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 Insured. The Insurer violated Florida Statute § 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(g) by failing to promptly notify the Insured of any additional information necessary for the processing of a claim. The Insured reported her claim on October 10, 2024. However, the Insurer sent a letter requesting documentation from the Insured on March 7, 2025. Also, the Insurer violated Florida Statute § 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(h) by failing to clearly explain the nature of the requested information and the reasons why such information is necessary. In the Insurer’s letter dated March 7, 2025, the Insurer requested documentation without explaining the necessity for such information. 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 Insured under the Policy in the amount of $183,977.83 (less the deductible and any prior payments), plus all statutory interest; (3) act fairly and honestly towards its Insured and with due regard for her interests in attempting to settle their Insured’s claim; (4) hold the claim open in the event that its errors and delay does or may cause the Insured to suffer either further loss and/or damage; and, (5) stipulate to the Insured’s 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
yisroel@ilgpa.com 12-23-2025 This Civil Remedy Notice is hereby withdrawn on behalf of Complainant.
yisroel@ilgpa.com 12-23-2025 This civil remedy notice is hereby withdrawn on behalf of Plaintiff.
jpatino@slideinsurance.com 04-29-2025 April 29, 2025 Via E-mail & Posting on DFS Website Rebecca Elimelech, Esq. Insurance Litigation Group, P.A. 1500 N.E. 162ND ST. MIAMI, FLORIDA 33162 RELIMELECH@ILGPA.COM RE: Insured: Ruth Ann Darrow Claim No: 202410008173 Policy No: SJ31165317 Date of loss: 10/09/2024 CRN Filing No.: 810225 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 Ruth Ann Darrow (“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. 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 not identifying the specific policy language they claim Slide failed to follow. 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, 351 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 as a claim for damages from Hurricane Milton on October 10, 2024. On October 24, 2024, Slide sent Independent Adjuster to inspect the insured property. Based on Slide’s investigation and evaluation of the claim, Slide issued its determination letter and undisputed payment of approximately $13,753.29. 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 multiple reasons for the filing of the Notice. However, no specific facts or circumstances are provided to support these allegations. Notwithstanding, Slide denies each and every allegation individually 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 an inspection 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 thoroughly investigated the loss upon receipt of the underlying claim and ultimately issued payment amount to return property to its pre-loss condition for covered damages. Zero evidence of a faulty or deficient settlement offer has been presented, as such Slide denies this allegation. 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 manner. Information necessary and relevant to the proceeding of the claim was communicated to the Insured or their representatives in an appropriate and timely manner. ALLEGED STATUTORY VIOLATIONS The CRN alleges seven (7) 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, payment was tendered to the Insured. 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 issued payment(s). 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, a prompt inspection of the insured 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)(b): Denied.  This allegation is without basis.  Slide has been forthcoming and truthful regarding the pertinent claim facts and/or insurance policy provisions relating to the reported loss. Slide’s correspondences and communications to the Insured and/or their representatives proves 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. 5. 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. 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. 7. 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(h): Denied.  This allegation is without basis.  Slide clearly and promptly notified the Insured and/or their representatives regarding the pertinent claim facts and specific information needed relating to the claim. Slide’s communications to the Insured and their representatives prove this fact.  Moreover, 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. 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 (727) 359-9802 or at jpatino@slideinsurance.com. Sincerely, /s/ John Patino John Patino, 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