Fifteen Interesting Questions Regarding Property Insurance Every Florida Adjuster Wants Answers

The Florida Department of Financial Services regulates those licensed to adjust claims in Florida. One of those licensed, is a long time friend and a person very familiar with the regulatory process, Mark Boardman. Boardman recently filed a unique Petition for Declaratory Statement with the Florida Department of Financial Services, asking fifteen pointed questions regarding the propriety of various property adjustment practices that are common in the field.

Those fifteen questions are:

QUESTION 1: If the contractor acquiesces to a lesser scope of work or unit cost, will the contractor have adjusted the claim on behalf of the insured?

QUESTION 2: If the contractor engages in any discussion with the insurance adjuster regarding the scope of work to be performed and the unit costs of the work, will the contractor be considered to have negotiated with the adjuster on behalf of the insured?

QUESTION 3: What is considered to be an "insurance claim form" as that term is used in Section 626.854(1), Florida Statutes?

QUESTION 4: Is a contract for repairs between a contractor and an insured considered "any other thing of value" as that term is used in Section 626.854(1), Florida Statutes?

QUESTION 5: How does the Department define "in any manner," as that term is used in Section 626.854(1), Florida Statutes?

QUESTION 6: If the contractor agrees to a reduced scope of work and a commensurate reduction in the overall cost of repairs, has the contractor "effectuated a settlement" with the insurance company as that term is used in Section 626.854(1), Florida Statutes?

QUESTION 7: If, in agreeing to the changes to the scope of work recommended by the insurance adjuster, the contractor has "effectuated a settlement" of the insured's claim, is the contractor in violation of the provisions of Section 626.854(1), Florida Statutes?

QUESTION 8: If, in discussing the scope of work included in the claim with the insurance adjuster, the contractor has engaged in "negotiating" the claim on behalf of the insured, is the contractor in violation of the provisions of Section 626.854(1), Florida Statutes?

QUESTION 9: Is the contractor in violation of the provisions of Section 626.854(1), Florida Statutes, if he advertizes that he will work with the insurance company to reach a settlement of any claims?

QUESTION 10: If the insurance adjuster is aware that the contractor is not a licensed public adjuster, is the insurance adjuster in violation of any Department rules or statutes by continuing to negotiate a settlement of the claim with the contractor?

QUESTION 11: As a licensed public adjuster, Petitioner uses printed materials such as letters, flyers or door hangers to solicit clients. In order to place the flyers, brochures, or door hangers on the insured's property, he must physically go onto the property. Petitioner is concerned that if he uses such printed material to contact an insured person within the first 48 hours after a casualty, he may run afoul of the Court's ruling and the Department's "executive construction" of Section 626.854(6), Florida Statutes, and be subject to disciplinary action. Thus, the following question: If, in the process of placing a flyer or door hanger on the premises of an insured person within the first 48 hours after a casualty, Petitioner is approached by an individual who may or may not be the insured or a member of the insured's family, is Petitioner allowed to talk to the individual(s) about his services once it is discovered that the person is the insured?

QUESTION 12: If, in the process of placing a flyer, brochure or door hanger on the premises of an insured person within the first 48 hours after a casualty, Petitioner is approached by an individual who may or may not be the insured or a member of the insured's family, is Petitioner allowed to talk to the individual(s) about his services once it is disclosed that the person is not the insured, or is this considered to be an "indirect contact" with the insured?

QUESTION 13: Rule 69B-220.201, F.A.C., entitled "Ethical Requirements," provides, in pertinent part:

(2) Violation
(a) Violation of any provision of this rule shall constitute grounds for administrative action against the licensee.
***
(3) Code of Ethics. The work of adjusting insurance claims engages the public trust. The adjuster shall put the duty for fair and honest treatment of the claimant above the adjusters own interests in every instance. The following are standards of conduct that define ethical behavior, and shall constitute a code of ethics that shall be binding on all adjusters.
***
(g) An adjuster shall promptly report to the Department any conduct by any licensed insurance representative of this state which violates any provision of the Insurance Code or Department rule or order.
The term “licensed insurance representative: is not defined by rule or statute. Please define.

QUESTION 14: Does the term “licensed insurance adjuster” include all types and classes of insurance adjusters (company, independent or public), subject to Chapter 626, Florida Statutes, or just licensed representatives of insurance companies?

QUESTION 15: In the event that Petitioner encounters a contractor negotiating a settlement with an insurance company representative/adjuster for a specific task for an insured person:

a. Is petitioner required under Rule 69B-220.201, F.A.C., to report the matter to the Department?
b. Is the petitioner required under Rule 69B-220.201, F.A.C., to report the suspected activities of the contractor to any other entity? Is so, what entity?

The issues are significant, especially regarding the adjustment functions of contractors. In the field, contractors are adjusting claims for insurers and for insureds. The Department may not realize this, but everybody involved in the adjustment business knows that the restoration construction industry is in bed with insurers. Those same contractors often tell insureds that they will negotiate with the insurance company and "do the job" for whatever the insurer will pay.

The answers to these questions are important to insurers and insureds. I am as curious as anybody to learn what they will be.

Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
http://www.propertyinsurancecoveragelaw.com/admin/trackback/220379
Comments (3) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
Mark D. Boardmabn - September 8, 2010 9:38 AM

I thank Mr Merlin in seeing the importance of the questions. But, one must understand the why as to seeking a Declaratory Statement.

During the Kortum vs Sink trial the DFS (Mr. Davidson) made it very clear that information on the DFS website is not to be considered a place of authority. Therefore, we are seeking answers. Below is the statement of DFS counsel at the trial.


"MR. DAVIDSON: Further objection. There are only three ways that an agency can speak definitely as to what a statute may or may not mean, a statute within its jurisdiction. And that’s provided in Chapter 120.

You can issue a declaratory statement if you’re asked to issue one, you can promulgate a rule to pronounce the position on a statute, or you can enter a final order to pronounce whatever the results of the statute is. Those are the only three ways an agency can speak.

Anything less is just chatter between people and of no consequence to the agency’s position as to how to interpret the statute. That’s the APA primer 101. You’ve got three ways the agency can speak to a statute. [Ex. B at 50]

* * *
. . . Website is not agency position, a rule, a dec statement or a final order. And the only way an agency can speak - - [Ex. B at 51]
* * *
. . . Once again, he’s asking where do you go to see what the Chief Financial Officer says. The Chief Financial Officer can only say things through rules, dec statements, and final orders. [Ex. B at 122]"

I would advise if you have a question that it be presented by this method and use of counsel.

Section 120.565, Florida Statutes, and Rule 28-105.002, Florida Administrative Code

Insurance Dispute - September 8, 2010 10:55 AM

One reason the carriers are permitted to negotiate with contractors is the fact that they are negotiating the "repairs" itself, and not really the policy language and coverage. You need to be licensed to interpret and discuss coverage. The contractors are negotiating the repairs. (Even though we all know they sometimes quote policy language.)

Secondly, PA's are being "paid" to interpret coverage and negotiate the claim. Contractors are not being "paid" to negotiate anything, they are paid for the repairs only. They collect no other fee for negotiating the repair estimate.

I don't agree with it, but this is how carriers get away with it. Surely, contractors miss coverage issues that save the carriers money, on top of saving the fee by not sending an independent adjuster to the loss.

Joe Brennan
ICG, Inc.

Roger Poe - September 11, 2010 10:11 AM

Interesting questions-

However, I believe many insureds are returned to the same "position" (or better, property restoration wise) much more quickly when a seasoned adjuster that has a solid reconstruction background, and a seasoned professional reconstruction contractor, have a detailed meeting of the minds to determine "event" damage, sound reconstruction protocols, and quality cost points.

These intrinsic reconstruction business issues are generally best understood by the seasoned reconstruction contractor, not their insured client, or a insurance adjuster, or a public adjuster, or an attorney, because of the nature of the daily demands of owning and/or operating that type of business.

Public insurance general contractors are as far from being public adjusters, as adjusters are from being general contractors. We don't just practice assessing and estimating theory, we actually put ones back in their residential and commercial structures.

Mr. Boardman - Public insurance general contractors do not "negotiate" with adjusters for ones insured, we discuss the needs of the reconstruction project, and our business needs.

Public adjusters and others should respect that our business model may be the overall best choice for many of ones insured, verses bogging down in how much can be "negotiated" from a carrier.

Oh, and is it wrong for me to put on my neighbor hat and inform my client to ask their agent/adjuster about ALE, should the reconstruction protocols determine they need that knowledge?

Is that a knowledge point I should not bring up out of fear of being fined as a contractor "acting as a PA"?

I find many of the questions above, by design, are looking too far into what it takes to get our neighbors back into their homes and businesses, and is yet another attempt to tie the hands of contractors in their own market to help their own client neighbors, and make a living.

Regarding problem solving towards indemnified structures, the contractor speaking to the insured, and then the insured speaking to the adjuster, and then the adjuster answering the insured, and the insured replying back to the contractor is a problematic communication circle that the direct contractor-to-adjuster communication approach avoids, and common sense demands.

Even the Texas Department of Insurance appears to recognize contractor-to-adjuster communications can be beneficial to ones insured -

"Chapter 4102 does not prohibit contractors from providing estimates or discussing those estimates and other technical information with an insurer or its adjuster."

http://www.tdi.state.tx.us/bulletins/2005/b-0060-05.html

I believe it can be assumed that in Texas, and by the context of the bulletin, that the "other technical information" mentioned is not referring to policy interpretation, but rather it is in regards to reconstruction protocols, and projected cost details.

I believe the same common sense contractor-to-adjuster communication principle benefits the general public good in Florida, Oklahoma, Colorado, and elsewhere, especially after a major or minor eco-catastrophe event.

-Roger Poe
CatContractor.org

Post A Comment / Question Use this form to add a comment to this entry.







Remember personal info?
Send To A Friend Use this form to send this entry to a friend via email.