Filing Number: 816230
|
| Filing Accepted: 4/15/2025 |
| Last/Business Name
*
|
|
|
MARUTI MOTEL LLC D/B/A ECONO INN
|
|
First Name |
|
|
|
| Street Address
*
|
|
24926 US HIGHWAY 27 |
| City, State Zip
*
|
|
LEESBURG,
FL
34748-89
|
| Email Address
*
|
|
CARRINGTON@MYLAWYERCAN.COM |
| Complainant Type:
*
|
|
Insured |
|
| Last/Business Name* |
|
MARUTI MOTEL LLC D/B/A ECONO INN |
|
First Name |
|
|
| Policy # * |
|
1372567664 |
|
Claim #* |
|
05000002128 |
|
Attorney is Applicable
|
| Last Name* |
JONES
First Name *
CARRINGTON
Initial
E
|
| Street Address* |
|
3333 S. ORANGE AVE, SUITE 104 |
| City, State Zip* |
|
ORLANDO
,
FL
32806
|
| Email Address * |
|
CARRINGTON@MYLAWYERCAN.COM |
|
|
| Insurer Type
*
|
|
 Authorized Insurer
 Unauthorized Insurer
|
|
|
| Insurer Name |
|
|
| Insurer Name* |
|
FRONTLINE INSURANCE UNLIMITED COMPANY
|
| Insurer Name* |
|
|
| Street Address* |
|
|
| City, State Zip* |
|
,
|
|
NAIC Company Code 10074 |
|
|
| Name of individual responsible for violation (if any):*
TIM CHIAPPE, KRISTIN FITCH - FL LICENSE # W176199, AND ALL OTHER ADJUSTERS, SUPERVISORS, MANAGEMENT AND INDIVIDUALS ASSOCIATED WITH OR RETAINED BY FIRST PROTECTIVE INSURANCE COMPANY D/B/A FRONTLINE INSURANCE INVOLVED IN THIS CLAIM
|
| Type of Insurance
*
Commercial Property & Casualty
|
|
|
| Reason for Notice
*
|
|
|
Unfair Trade Practice
|
|
|
Claim Delay
|
|
|
Claim Denial
|
|
|
*
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)(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.
|
|
*
Specific policy language that is relevant to the violation.
Enter all words or phrases (one at a time) that should be used to filter.
1. BUILDING AND PERSONAL PROPERTY COVERAGE FORM (CP 00 10 06 07), Section A – Coverage:
“We will pay for direct physical loss of or damage to Covered Property at the premises described in the Declarations caused by or resulting from any Covered Cause of Loss.”
2. LOSS CONDITIONS, Section E(3) – Duties In The Event Of Loss Or Damage:
“You must see that the following are done in the event of loss or damage to Covered Property: … (7) Send us a signed, sworn proof of loss containing the information we request to investigate the claim. You must do this within 60 days after our request. We will supply you with the necessary forms.”
3. LOSS CONDITIONS, Section E(4)(g) – Loss Payment:
“We will pay for covered loss or damage within 30 days after we receive the sworn proof of loss, if you have complied with all of the terms of this Coverage Part and:
(1) We have reached agreement with you on the amount of loss; or
(2) An appraisal award has been made.”
4. LOSS CONDITIONS, Section E(2) – Appraisal:
“If we and you disagree on the value of the property or the amount of loss, either may make written demand for an appraisal of the loss. In this event, each party will select a competent and impartial appraiser. The two appraisers will select an umpire...”
5. CONDITIONS, Section D – Deductible:
“In any one occurrence of loss or damage… If the adjusted amount of loss exceeds the Deductible, we will then subtract the Deductible from the adjusted amount of loss, and will pay the resulting amount or the Limit of Insurance, whichever is less.”
6. Florida Endorsement CP 01 25 02 12, Section D – Loss Payment:
“Provided you have complied with all the terms of this Coverage Part, we will pay for covered loss or damage upon the earliest of the following:
(1) Within 20 days after we receive the sworn proof of loss and reach written agreement with you;
(2) Within 30 days after we receive the sworn proof of loss and an appraisal award or final judgment is entered; or
(3) Within 90 days of receiving notice of an initial, reopened or supplemental claim, unless we deny the claim during that time.”
|
| |
*
Facts and circumstances giving rise to the violation.
Enter all words or phrases (one at a time) that should be used to filter.
Maruti Motel LLC d/b/a Econo Inn (the “Insured”) purchased a commercial insurance policy from First Protective Insurance Company d/b/a Frontline Insurance (“Frontline”), insuring the property located at 24926 US Highway 27, Leesburg, FL 34748 (the “Property”). On or about September 21, 2023, the Property sustained significant physical loss and damage as a result of a windstorm. The Insured promptly reported the claim to Frontline on January 26, 2024. Frontline acknowledged the claim and issued a coverage determination dated January 30, 2024, which was not received by the Insured until February 15, 2024. In that letter, Frontline advised that it found damages totaling $4,477.19 in Replacement Cost Value (RCV), but applied $1,416.68 in recoverable depreciation and a $3,474.80 deductible, ultimately issuing no payment whatsoever. The letter was not accompanied by an itemized estimate or clear explanation of the coverage under which the amount was determined, in violation of § 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(f), Fla. Stat.
On March 28, 2024, Frontline represented in writing that its investigation of the claim had been completed. Believing this would result in resolution, the Insured retained a licensed public adjuster on May 21, 2024, to assist with finalizing the true scope of necessary repairs. The public adjuster completed an inspection and prepared a detailed estimate totaling $131,001.03 RCV and $115,088.70 ACV, reflecting widespread damage far beyond what Frontline originally acknowledged. The estimate, along with a Sworn Proof of Loss, was submitted to Frontline. Instead of re-evaluating its original position or issuing undisputed payment, Frontline refused to reassess the claim.
On September 4, 2024, the Insured submitted a formal demand for mediation pursuant to Florida Statute § 627.7015, seeking to resolve the dispute without litigation. However, on September 13, 2024, Frontline denied the request, stating that mediation was not available under the commercial policy. Then, on October 10, 2024, the Property sustained additional storm-related damages as a result of Hurricane Milton, which triggered a second claim.
Rather than meaningfully addressing either claim, on October 22, 2024, Frontline issued a demand for an Examination Under Oath (EUO). This demand came seven months after the insurer claimed its investigation was complete and only after the Insured had retained a public adjuster and submitted evidence of a substantially greater scope of damages. The timing and nature of the EUO demand are indicative of bad faith—used not as a genuine investigative tool but as a delay tactic to obstruct the Insured’s ability to recover owed insurance benefits.
On October 28, 2024, the Insured filed a Notice of Intent to Initiate Litigation pursuant to Florida Statute § 627.70152. In response, Frontline contradicted its prior position and demanded mediation on November 8, 2024, despite having denied the same process just two months earlier. This inconsistent and opportunistic invocation of mediation—denying it when initiated by the Insured and later demanding it for litigation leverage—underscores the insurer’s lack of good faith in handling this claim.
Lastly, with the Hurricane Milton claim still pending, Frontline issued a denial letter dated December 18, 2024. In this letter, Frontline cited a “prior loss or damage” exclusion, using the unresolved September 2023 claim as justification to deny coverage for the new loss. This amounts to a compounding of prior bad faith conduct and reflects a broader strategy of delaying and avoiding rightful payment by weaponizing policy exclusions and prior underpayment.
Frontline’s actions in this matter constitute violations of § 624.155(1)(b)(1), Fla. Stat., which imposes a duty to settle claims in good faith when, under the circumstances, it could and should have done so. The insurer failed to reassess its lowball determination despite being presented with overwhelming contrary evidence. It used the EUO process to delay, ignored or denied valid dispute resolution procedures, and improperly applied policy exclusions to avoid liability. These actions also violate § 626.9541(1)(i)(2), Fla. Stat., by making material misrepresentations for the purpose of underpayment; § 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(a), Fla. Stat., by failing to implement standards for proper claim investigation; § 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(b), Fla. Stat., by misrepresenting pertinent policy terms; and § 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(f), Fla. Stat., by failing to clearly explain the coverage decisions.
This conduct parallels that condemned in Fortune v. First Protective Ins. Co., 302 So. 3d 485 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020), where the court confirmed that invoking appraisal or post-cure procedures does not negate bad faith committed during claim handling. Like Fortune, the Insured here was forced to endure a pattern of underpayment, misrepresentation, and delay tactics, only to then be forced into litigation to recover what was rightfully owed under the policy.
To cure the violations set forth in this Civil Remedy Notice, Frontline must:
1. Immediately tender all insurance proceeds due and owing under the policy in the amount of $131,001.03 ($115,088.70 ACV) or a reasonably negotiated sum supported by documentation;
2. Pay all statutory interest, public adjuster fees, and reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred by the Insured;
3. Withdraw its denial of the Hurricane Milton claim and process that claim in good faith; and
4. Provide written assurance that its internal claim-handling procedures will be reviewed and amended to ensure future compliance with Florida law.
This Civil Remedy Notice is submitted in accordance with Florida Statutes § 624.155 to preserve the Insured’s right to pursue statutory remedies should Frontline fail to cure within the prescribed statutory period.
|
|
|
*
|
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
|