An article in the Insurance Journal, New Hampshire Body Shop Owner ‘Winging’ Own Case Beats State Farm in High Court, about an assignment of benefits (AOB) case caught my attention. State Farm’s attorneys lost to a non-lawyer in New Hampshire’s Supreme Court.1 The dollar dispute was overwhelmed by the practical implications of the case. The article noted in part:
Continue Reading Assignment of Benefits Post Loss—New Hampshire Looks To Policy Language
All insureds should review their insurance policies before transferring any rights to third-parties under their property insurance. Some policies include clauses regarding this matter and limit the assignment or transfer of rights under a claim.
Continue Reading Do Third Parties have Any Rights in an Insurance Claim?
A second court of appeals in Florida has upheld a limitation in a policy that prevents assignments of property insurance claim benefits only if all policyholders and the mortgagee agree to the assignment.
Continue Reading Assignment of Benefits Valid Only If All Policyholders and the Mortgagee Agree
In my initial blog on the Assignment of Benefits (AOB) reform statute, I described the 20th Judicial Circuit Court’s decision finding that §627.7152 cannot retroactively change substantive rights.1 This holding found that the law in effect when the subject policy was entered into applied to the assignment of benefits contract at issue in subsequent litigation. While the holding in that case focused on both pre-suit requirements and attorney’s fees and costs as the substantive rights being considered, another Florida court has recently discussed a similar concept regarding the retroactive applicability of the statute.
Continue Reading Florida Assignment of Benefits Reform Statute Does Not Retroactively Apply: Part 2
Insurance policies commonly include language specifically forbidding an insured from assigning their rights and interests under the policy without the consent of the insurance company.
Continue Reading Colorado Allows Post-Loss Assignment of Claim Regardless of Insurance Policy Anti-Assignment Clause
In December of last year, my colleague Ashley Harris discussed Security First Insurance Co. v. Florida Office of Insurance Regulation,1 where the Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal (Fifth DCA) upheld the Office of Insurance Regulation (“OIR”) prohibition of proposed language in an insurance policy that would require “all insureds, all additional insureds and all mortgagees” named on a policy to consent to any post-loss assignment of benefits (“AOBs”) to a third party.
Continue Reading Appellate Court Disagrees with Sister Court on Assignment of Benefits
The Arizona Court of Appeals in a recent opinion said, Yes to both. In Farmers Insurance Exchange v. Udall,1 four homeowners insured by Farmers Insurance Exchange (“Farmers”) sustained separate losses, which required water damage mitigation and restoration services. The homeowners hired a vendor to perform the mitigation and restoration services. In each case, the insureds assigned to the vendor their “rights, benefits, proceeds and causes of action” under their respective insurance policies.
Continue Reading Can Post-Loss Benefits be Assigned to a Mitigation/Restoration Vendor if the Policy Contains an Anti-Assignment Provision? Can the Vendor then Sue the Insurance Company?
Assignment of benefits is one of the hottest topics in Florida first party property insurance and it’s no secret that insurance carriers are not in favor of AOBs. Some insurance carriers, like Security First Insurance Company, tried to take matters into their own hands and add language into their homeowners, condominium unit owners and “dwelling fire” policies that would require the “insureds, additional insureds and mortgagees” named on a policy to consent to any post-loss assignment of benefits to a third party.
Continue Reading Attempt to Bar Post-Loss Assignment of Benefits Denied
I’m currently on a flight to Cincinnati and felt that it would be a perfect time for a new post in my series on Assignment of Benefits (“AOB”) tackling this issue in Ohio.
Continue Reading Assignment of Benefits, Part 13: Ohio
Unauthorized practice of public adjusting issues are going to the Texas Supreme Court. Lon Smith Roofing is not giving up and filed a petition which should be read by those with interests in the property insurance claims industry. I have previously discussed this case in:
Continue Reading Unauthorized Practice of Public Adjusting Case Petitioned to Texas Supreme Court