We’ll let the jury decide. Policyholders must meet post-loss obligations under their property insurance policy prior to receiving coverage for a loss. A common condition precedent requires policyholders to provide prompt notice of the loss to their carrier. The carrier must be able to conduct a reasonable investigation of the property conditions as close to … Continue Reading
Most property insurance policies require that the insured must provide “prompt” notice of a loss as soon as possible after a covered loss. While many states throughout the country have adopted the Notice-Prejudice Rule which prevents an insurer from denying a claim unless it can demonstrate actual prejudice resulting from the delayed notice of loss, … Continue Reading
Contrary to most New York policies which require notice to be given “promptly”, Connecticut policies tend to require notice “as soon as practical.”… Continue Reading
As discussed in my previous blog post regarding the tropical storm watch issued for parts of Long Island because of Hurricane Jose, as soon as damage is discovered, it should be reported to the insurance company, even if you think it is minor and not something that the insurance company will bother with.… Continue Reading
Many of our recent blogs—before Hurricane Irma made landfall—discussed hurricane preparedness. In those posts, we urged insureds to have their insurance policies handy so they would have the pertinent information to notify their insurance carrier of their loss.… Continue Reading
When the storms of 2004 and 2005 slammed Florida and the Southeast, policyholders had a duty to notify the carrier of the loss and sometimes things went wrong during these communications. Part of the problem was because many claims were just telephoned in and many of the carriers used untrained adjusters who did not have … Continue Reading
Carriers and their lawyer cite the Hamilton1 case for the proposition that a nineteen-month delay in reporting a loss is, as a matter of law, not prompt and therefore prejudices the carrier from investigating the claim. Interestingly, the main evidence presented by the policyholder in Hamilton was deposition testimony from the two insurance adjusters who … Continue Reading
I previously posted a video about late notice of claims and the effect thereof nationwide. Recently, the Supreme Court of Montana re-affirmed that an insurer must show actual prejudice before denying a claim because of late notice.… Continue Reading
If an insured fails to provide prompt notice of its property loss, it can often be grounds for denial of coverage. Most policies have a provision that notice be given promptly, immediately, or as soon as practicable. The question then becomes what is “prompt notice”? In PDQ Coolidge Formad, LLC v. Landmark American Insurance Company,1 … Continue Reading
In practically every insurance policy, a policyholder is required to give prompt notice of the claim before the insurance company has any responsibility to act on the claim. What happens if the policyholder substantially delays in giving notice of the claim, or in some circumstances, fails to give notice altogether? Is the policyholder’s claim automatically … Continue Reading
I spent the past several weeks discussing the proof of loss requirements in New York. Hopefully, the posts provided insight. A somewhat related issue is notice of a loss, and the requirements under New York law. The second section of the statute I discussed over the last several weeks also addresses notice of loss under … Continue Reading
Proof of Loss requirements have been a hot topic on the blog this week. As part of my series on North Carolina claims, I had to join the conversation and make sure those who have claims in North Carolina are aware of the requirements regarding Sworn Statements of Proof of Loss. In North Carolina, policyholders … Continue Reading
In my October 13, 2012, post, I gave an overview of an ongoing blog topic for me – post-claim / pre-suit insurance policy conditions. In my October 26, 2012, post, I gave some insight on compliance with an insurer’s request for examination. In my November 2, 2012, post, I wrote about proofs of loss. November … Continue Reading
The Fourth District Court of Appeals in Florida recently issued another opinion in a late notice Hurricane Wilma case, Slominski v. Citizens Property Insurance Corporation.1 The Court clarified its previous opinion in Kroener v. FIGA.2 Citizens argued in Slominski that Kroener stands for the proposition that a claim made over two and one-half years after the … Continue Reading
It’s never good to be late on your first date . . . It’s never good to be late on your first day of class . . . It’s never good to be late on your first day at work . . . It’s never good to be late when presenting your claim to your … Continue Reading
I recently blogged about the insurer’s duty to “thoroughly” investigate a claim and what constitutes a “thorough” investigation. But when does the duty to investigate arise? In California, an insurer’s duty to investigate does not arise until it has notice of a claim. While this sounds simple enough, there are some aspects of the notice … Continue Reading
The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeals has been busy with late notice Hurricane Wilma cases on appeal. Trial courts within the Fourth District have disposed of these cases, finding as a matter of law that late notice prejudiced insurers. Judges generally decide questions of law, while questions of fact are left for the trier … Continue Reading
On June 27, 2011, in What Has Happened To The Rebuttable Presumption Of Prejudice In A Recent Late Notice Case, I discussed how the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal had issued its opinion in Kroener v. FIGA1 did not discuss the Florida Supreme Court’s rebuttable presumption of prejudice test and held that notice of … Continue Reading
A case issued yesterday shows when late notice is simply far too late. The policyholders lost in Kramer v. State Farm Florida Insurance Company,1 because they had no proof that the insurer was not prejudiced by the late notice of the loss. There should be an asterisk to this post because the lesson is that if … Continue Reading
On June 13, 2012, The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas granted summary judgment in favor of a liability insurer that seeking a declaration of non-coverage for a claim for cleanup costs associated with an environmental discharge. In St. Paul Surplus Lines Ins. Co. v. Davis Gulf Coast Inc., No. 11-0403 (S.D. … Continue Reading
Those familiar with Hurricane Wilma litigation in South Florida may be fully aware of a recent trend of trial court rulings which take cases away from juries, seemingly depriving policyholders of their days in court. Summary judgment rulings on “late notice” defenses basically ended the cases and took the factual determinations away from the jury. … Continue Reading
Hurricane Wilma litigation carries on in Florida courts, now almost 6 and a half years after the storm. One issue often raised in the litigation is timely notice of the claim. While policies differ, most require that the insured provide notice of a loss to the insurer with some degree of expediency. Late notice of … Continue Reading
After two recent trials in federal court in South Florida, two different juries found different results in allegedly late filed hurricane insurance claims. Most property insurance policies require that the policyholder notify the insurance company of loss or damage with some degree of expediency, however most policies do not specify when notice will be late … Continue Reading
How often do insurance companies get it right the first time? If they don’t, whose responsibility is it to correct them and give them a second chance? As demonstrated through litigation on many hurricane claims, the insurance companies may tell you it is the policyholder’s responsibility to notify them of newfound damage after a claim … Continue Reading
