Tag Archives: Colorado

Overhead and Profit Should be Included with Payments Made on Actual Cash Value Basis

While many carriers continue their attempt to exclude overhead and profit from property damage claim payments made on an actual cash value basis, the majority approach across the United States has been to include general contractor overhead and profit in actual cash value payments for losses where repairs would be reasonably likely to require a … Continue Reading

Colorado Allows Contractors to Bring Statutory Bad Faith Claim as First-Party Claimant

With its 2008 enactment of Colorado Revised Statute § 10-3-1115 and § 10-3-1116, Colorado has created one of the country’s strongest statutory bad faith causes of action. What makes Colorado’s bad faith statute even more exceptional is that it allows a repair vendor, such as a roofer or restoration contractor, to assert a claim for … Continue Reading

An Insurer’s Obligation to Match: Comparable Materials and Quality

Policyholders purchase property insurance and pay lofty premiums with the intention of their insured property being restored to where it was prior to a loss. But what happens when the loss affects only a portion of the siding or has destroyed only a handful of discontinued roofing tiles? Is the policyholder forced to accept mismatching … Continue Reading

An Appraiser Can Favor One Side More than the Other and Still Be Impartial

The typical appraisal provision in an insurance policy requires that each party select a competent and impartial appraiser. However, what impartial means is usually undefined in the policy. Does advocacy on behalf of your appointed party mean you are not impartial? That question was recently addressed by the Colorado Court of Appeals in Owners Ins. … Continue Reading

Colorado Statutory Bad Faith: Doubling Down On An Insurer’s Unreasonable Delay Or Denial

In August 2008, Colorado created a statutory bad faith claim of action for first-party policyholders not only separate and distinct from a claim for common law bad faith breach of an insurance contract, but establishes a much more reasonable threshold to prevail against an insurer under Colorado Revised Statute § 10-3-1115 and Colorado Revised Statute … Continue Reading

Colorado Joins a Growing List of Jurisdictions Allowing Depreciation of Labor Costs When Determining Actual Cash Value

While I often argue that depreciating labor simply does not make sense, insurers continue to push the question of whether the depreciation of labor costs in Actual Cash Value policies is acceptable. Though several jurisdictions have rejected the depreciation of labor, surprisingly, the recent trend of jurisdictions touching upon the subject has been to allow … Continue Reading

Colorado Hail Storm Seminar

Colorado Springs was hit by epic hail storms this past July. Reports noted tennis ball size hail and citizens shoveling away hail as if it were a snowstorm. A massive number of hail storm insurance claims resulted. As sure as the sun rises, disputes about how much is covered and the amount owed under the … Continue Reading

RMAPIA presentation on Colorado’s Homeowners Insurance Reform Act

Last week, Corey Harris and I had the pleasure of speaking at the RMAPIA (Rocky Mountain Association of Public Insurance Adjusters) annual meeting. This organization consists of Public Adjusters who work in Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming. We covered many topics, including Colorado’s Homeowners Insurance Reform Act of 2013. This … Continue Reading

Fair and Impartial Appraisers in Colorado

A daily topic of conversation among those who work property damage claims is the appraisal process. As most of you know, most insurance contracts contain a clause that states that if there is disagreement between the insured and insurer on the claim handling process that either party may invoke the appraisal process. Each party selects … Continue Reading

“Fairly Debatable” and “Two Times the Covered Benefit” Under Colorado law

“Fairly debatable” bad faith claims The term “fairly debatable” is frequently discussed in the context of bad faith claims in Colorado. In Sanderson,1 the district court and appellate court had different ideas as to the meaning of the phrase. They looked to the Arizona Supreme Court’s statement2 that “[w]hile it is clear that an insurer … Continue Reading
LexBlog